Seneca Golf: Turning Stats into Practice Priorities

After a round, GHIN showed me what happened. It did not tell me which part of my game deserved my limited practice time—or why.

I built Seneca Golf to turn those statistics into a practice priority. The Game Improvement Finder compares a focused set of inputs with age and handicap benchmarks, ranks the gaps, and explains each opportunity. Designing first for my own needs enabled fast iteration, but the experience still needs validation with other golfers.

Outcome — A functioning prototype that helps golfers choose a practice focus and inspect the comparisons behind it.

Improvement Opportunities lead the experience; Distance Benchmarks provide supporting context.

The Question Behind the Statistics

In my own review workflow, three questions remained unanswered:

• 1

  No benchmarks

  I could not compare my results with similar or lower-handicap golfers.

• 2

  No progression path

  I could not see the performance required to reach the next level.

• 3

  No prioritization

  I could not tell which gap deserved my limited practice time.

I could see my numbers, but I could not tell whether they were good, what better golfers were achieving, or what I should work on next.

My GHIN Round Review

GHIN showed what happened in the round, but not how the results compared, what better golfers achieved, or which gap mattered most.

Putting Improvement Opportunities First

The key design decision was to organize the experience around a practice choice. I moved Game Improvement ahead of Distance Benchmarks so golfers compare opportunities across their game before exploring the supporting detail.

Age and handicap define the comparison group. Five performance inputs—driving distance, fairways hit, greens in regulation, putts per round, and 2-putts-or-better—are ranked by modeled percentile, with the largest relative gap first.

Recommendation Inputs

A focused set of inputs is enough to place a golfer in a cohort and compare each stat against that cohort’s average.

Recommendation Inputs

User Inputs

↓

Benchmark Comparison

↓

Relative Gaps

↓

Ranked Recommendation

Each opportunity pairs the comparison with a plain-language interpretation. The order reflects relative performance gaps—not measured strokes lost or a prediction of which change will lower scores most.

Ranked Recommendation Result

1 2 3 4

Statistics → cohort comparison → ranked opportunities. The result offers a starting point for practice, supported by an explanation.

Ranked Recommendation Result

• 1

  Rank badge

  “Your #1 Opportunity” surfaces the single highest-priority gap first, not a full list to sort through.

• 2

  Plain-language interpretation

  What the percentile means and what to actually practice.

• 3

  You vs. Your Cohort

  The personal result placed directly next to the figure it’s being judged against.

• 4

  Relative gap badge

  The distance between the two, e.g. “-5% vs cohort.”

Distance Benchmarks as Supporting Context

The first version answered a narrower question: how does a golfer’s distance compare with peers of a similar age and handicap? That view now supports the broader practice decision led by the Game Improvement Finder.

Below the chart, “Path to More Distance” turns the benchmark into useful context: estimated swing speed, projected gains, and the next percentile milestones.

Benchmark View

1 2 3

The distance view provides context by club, age, and handicap, with estimated percentile bands and a personal marker.

Benchmark View

• 1

  Percentile range

  Estimated 10th, 50th, and 90th percentile lines put a distance result within a modeled range.

• 2

  Cohort comparison

  Filter by handicap group — 0–5, 6–15, 16–25, 26+ — instead of one blended average.

• 3

  Longer distances

  The upper band represents longer distances within the selected cohort; it does not establish overall playing ability.

Path to More Distance

1 2 3

Three cards translate the benchmark position into actionable context the golfer can use to set goals.

Path to More Distance

• 1

  Your Position

  Estimated swing speed and cohort percentile give the golfer a baseline to measure against.

• 2

  If You Gain Speed

  Projected distance gains at +1, +5, and +10 mph show what speed training could yield at current strike efficiency.

• 3

  Percentile Milestones

  Concrete targets — the distance and speed needed to reach the 50th, 75th, and 90th percentile.

Outcome, Trust, and Next Steps

Making the Basis of Each Recommendation Visible

Public golf-performance data is incomplete across age, handicap, club, and performance category. I combined published benchmarks with modeled estimates, then disclosed the sources, assumptions, and limitations so the guidance would not appear more certain than it is.

From Reviewing Results to Choosing a Focus