The phrase “drive for show, putt for dough” is a long-standing mantra in golf that emphasises the importance of putting over driving – specifically driving distance – in winning golf tournaments. But is it true?

While the saying has a clear implication, modern data from professional golf paints a more complex picture.   Using the Shots Gained (SG) metric we can compare different parts of a player’s game to see if there really is a formula for winning.

Driving test

Using shot data gained from datagolf.com we can compare the top players in the world (according to the Official World Golf Ranking) over the last 12 months.

Comparing “shots gained off the tee” with “shots gained putting” seems to turn the myth on its head – the top players gain a higher proportion of their shots off the tee than from putting.  For players ranked in the Top 10, nearly 0.8 shots are gained from driving as opposed to around 0.3 for putting.  Whilst the differential narrows as the players’ ranking decreases, for players ranked 90 – 100, driving still gains more than 0.2 shots more putting.

This ability to reliably gain strokes through driving gives top pros an edge, setting them up for better scoring opportunities throughout a tournament. Over a whole season, this advantage compounds and allows them to stay at the top of the leaderboards.

The long and the short

However, since “shots gained off the tee” includes par 4 and 5s, the metric is not necessarily just a measure of the importance of driving distance, but also a measure of accuracy.  So, whilst driving matters, is it the distance or the trajectory that is most advantageous for winning tournaments?

Again, using the top ranked players, it appears that distance stands out as a key factor for success, with Top 10 players on average gaining nearly 10 yards per drive compared with those outside the Top 100 throughout the year. This extra yardage translates into shorter approaches and better chances to attack pins throughout the season.

These findings are corroborated by Mark Broadie in his 2014 book Every Shot Counts, where he shows that for professionals, an extra 20 yards of driving distance is worth about three-quarters of a stroke per round.   Relatively speaking, for the rest of us amateur golfers, driving distance becomes even more important for scoring than driving accuracy.

Putt to the test

While driving distance provides the groundwork for long term success – and is a characteristic that all the Top 10 players seemingly must possess – it doesn’t necessarily “bust the myth” that putting is more important for winning tournaments.  Indeed, looking more deeply into the metrics for the outcome of individual tournaments uncovers the fact that putting becomes more instrumental for who comes out on top.

If we look instead at the finish positions in PGA events over the last 12 months, rather than the World Ranking, putting comes to the fore.  For players finishing first, putting gained an average of 1.2 shots versus a gain of 0.7 for driving.  Even for players finishing 30^th – 35^th, putting is worth more than 0.4 of a shot on average compared to driving. The fact that top finishers in a given event typically post higher gains from putting rather than from driving underscores the vital role of putting during tournament play where players have to capitalize on scoring opportunities and avoid mistakes on the green to win.

The outcome

Fundamentally the relationship between driving and putting reveals a balanced formula for success. Driving creates opportunities and contributes to consistency while putting often decides who makes the best of those opportunities and ultimately wins on a given weekend. In a game of ever-increasing competition and precision, power and finesse must work together to elevate players to the pinnacle of the sport.

With all the attention on these extremes of golf, other aspects are often overlooked. Completing the same analyses and including shots gained for “approach” and “around the green” makes it clear that there is one area that consistently contributes to wins and ranking, making it arguably the most important aspect of a players golf game.

Katya Machuganova, Gaming Product and Partnerships Manager at Silverback Gaming, on where the crash format originates and how studios have continued to up the ante with the games that are hitting the market today

The rise of crash games has been so meteoric that we haven’t taken the time to look back at where the format originally came from.

It’s easy to see how the industry has become distracted by crash games and their ability to tap into lucrative but hard-to-reach audiences like Millennials and Gen Z.

But to determine the direction we now take with the format it’s important to understand where it originated and why it was able to generate such tremendous momentum in a short space of time.

The genesis of crash games:

MoneyPot was the first ever crash game and it was produced back in 2014 by Eric Springer, a Canadian developer and Bitcoin enthusiast.

Springer introduced the game on the Bitcoin Talk forum and drew inspiration for the format from the crazy volatility of the cryptocurrency markets where assets can skyrocket and then crash in value.

In 2015, Springer sold MoneyPot to Ryan Havar who rebranded the game to Bustabit and moved it to a new site where it can still be played today.

Havar kept much of the core gameplay the same, including a last-longer bonus. This saw 1% collected for every player’s wager that went into a bonus prize which went to the last player to cash out successfully.

In 2018, Havar decided to sell Bustabit to another crypto developer, Daniel Evans, who made a few tweaks to the game including removing the bonus system.

Evans still operates Bustabit to this day and even allows third-party investors to bankroll the game in return for a share of its profits.

The next generation of crash games arrive:

With crash a popular but niche game format for crypto enthusiasts, it took developer SPRIBE to catapult it into the mainstream with the launch of Aviator in 2019.

Aviator was the first crash game developed for online casino players and was the catalyst for the surge in popularity the format has attracted since.

Given the success of Aviator and the rising demand for non-traditional content, studios have continued to move the needle and come up with their own crash games.

Some use the same aeroplane theme as Aviator, while others are based around sports, Wild West shootouts, hot air balloons and many other themes.

These games mostly take the increasing curve format with a multiplier that continues to rise – players must then decide when to cash out.

If they go too early, the win will be small, but wait too long the curve crashes, taking their accrued winnings and original stake with it.

What makes crash games so popular:

Players are drawn to the intuitive and simple format of crash games – even those new to the format can pick it up in a couple of game rounds.

Players like that these games are usually multiplayer and with social features such as a chat and leaderboards where they can compete with others for the highest multiplier score.

Crash games work incredibly well on mobile – which has seen them really hit the mark with players in emerging markets – and this has driven their appeal among younger audiences, too.

In fact, the high risk/high reward nature of the gameplay – which has its roots in those volatile crypto markets – really appeals to those players.

The rise and fall of crash IP

Given the huge success of crash games, and in particular SPRIBE’s Aviator, it should come as no surprise that the format has had its fair share of controversy.

Most notable is the legal case SPRIBE has found itself embroiled in – another company has argued that SPRIBE has breached the IP it holds for the Aviator logo and brand assets.

The case is ongoing and shows the growing attention that is being paid to intellectual property rights within the crash game genre, a genre whose value is only set to rise.

Crash is a huge opportunity for studios:

Crash presents a huge opportunity for studios and is one that Silverback Gaming is looking to explore with our first crash title set to hit the market shortly.

It will be offered in the simulated gaming format initially before being rolled out as a real money game later in the year.

Just as with slots, studios are not looking to differentiate within the crash vertical and the way we have approached this is to give players more control over the gameplay.

With our crash game, they can toggle the level of risk/reward they wish to play to – this degree of personalisation is simply not being offered by the current games in the market.

We are really excited about our first crash game and the scope within the format for us, and other studios, to continue to innovate and push boundaries, just as Eric Springer did back in 2014.