Tournaments / 2015-2016
Shell Houston Open
2016-03-31 · GC of Houston
- Winner
- Jim Herman
- Winning score
- -15
- Field
- 145
- Field strength
- +0.101 SG
The 2015-2016 Shell Houston Open was played at GC of Houston, starting 31 March 2016. Jim Herman won at 15 under par (273), 1 stroke ahead of Henrik Stenson. The winning card was 69, 69, 67 and 68, and the win paid $1,224,000. Henrik Stenson finished second, and Dustin Johnson was third. 145 players started the event. The field averaged +0.101 strokes gained per round against the tour baseline, with strokes-gained data covering 88% of the players. The full leaderboard below lists every player's finish position, round scores and total to par. Every figure on this page comes from the published final leaderboard for the event — nothing here is estimated or modelled.
Final leaderboard
Top 20 of 145. Search finds any player in the field, including those who missed the cut.
- Jim Herman
- Pos
- 1
- R1
- 69
- R2
- 69
- R3
- 67
- R4
- 68
- Total
- 273
- Henrik Stenson
- Pos
- 2
- R1
- 69
- R2
- 71
- R3
- 66
- R4
- 68
- Total
- 274
- Dustin Johnson
- Pos
- 3
- R1
- 65
- R2
- 71
- R3
- 70
- R4
- 69
- Total
- 275
- Rafa Cabrera Bello
- Pos
- 4
- R1
- 71
- R2
- 72
- R3
- 68
- R4
- 65
- Total
- 276
- Daniel Berger
- Pos
- T5
- R1
- 67
- R2
- 74
- R3
- 70
- R4
- 66
- Total
- 277
- Russell Henley
- Pos
- T5
- R1
- 70
- R2
- 68
- R3
- 68
- R4
- 71
- Total
- 277
- Charles Howell III
- Pos
- T7
- R1
- 69
- R2
- 69
- R3
- 72
- R4
- 68
- Total
- 278
- Chez Reavie
- Pos
- T7
- R1
- 66
- R2
- 70
- R3
- 72
- R4
- 70
- Total
- 278
- Kyle Reifers
- Pos
- T7
- R1
- 70
- R2
- 70
- R3
- 68
- R4
- 70
- Total
- 278
- Patrick Reed
- Pos
- T10
- R1
- 69
- R2
- 71
- R3
- 72
- R4
- 67
- Total
- 279
- Rickie Fowler
- Pos
- T10
- R1
- 69
- R2
- 70
- R3
- 70
- R4
- 70
- Total
- 279
- Sean O'Hair
- Pos
- T10
- R1
- 68
- R2
- 73
- R3
- 69
- R4
- 69
- Total
- 279
- Charl Schwartzel
- Pos
- T13
- R1
- 69
- R2
- 72
- R3
- 70
- R4
- 69
- Total
- 280
- Johnson Wagner
- Pos
- T13
- R1
- 66
- R2
- 76
- R3
- 69
- R4
- 69
- Total
- 280
- Jordan Spieth
- Pos
- T13
- R1
- 67
- R2
- 73
- R3
- 70
- R4
- 70
- Total
- 280
- Phil Mickelson
- Pos
- T13
- R1
- 69
- R2
- 71
- R3
- 71
- R4
- 69
- Total
- 280
- Si Woo Kim
- Pos
- T13
- R1
- 69
- R2
- 71
- R3
- 69
- R4
- 71
- Total
- 280
- Jamie Lovemark
- Pos
- 18
- R1
- 67
- R2
- 68
- R3
- 70
- R4
- 76
- Total
- 281
- Cameron Smith
- Pos
- T19
- R1
- 69
- R2
- 72
- R3
- 72
- R4
- 69
- Total
- 282
- Jamie Donaldson
- Pos
- T19
- R1
- 69
- R2
- 68
- R3
- 74
- R4
- 71
- Total
- 282
Model score
Backtest · reconstructedOur course-fit model re-run as it would have seen this week — using only data that existed before the first tee shot — then compared with how the 81 players actually finished. It was not published in advance, so this measures the model, not a call we made.
- Rank correlation
- +0.474
- Top-20 hit rate
- 60%
- Top-10 avg model rank
- 18.3
Grade is this event’s percentile (90th) against every other event we have scored — not an absolute pass mark. Rank correlation runs −1 to +1, where 0 is a coin flip and a full-field golf model landing near +0.35 is a genuine read.
Who the model liked
Its top 10, and where they finished.
| Player | Model | Finish |
|---|---|---|
| Jordan Spieth | 1st | 13th |
| Henrik Stenson | 2nd | 2nd |
| Dustin Johnson | 3rd | 3rd |
| Ryan Palmer | 4th | 38th |
| Rickie Fowler | 5th | 10th |
| Phil Mickelson | 6th | 13th |
| Sergio Garcia | 7th | 72nd |
| Jimmy Walker | 8th | 19th |
| Patrick Reed | 9th | 10th |
| Harris English | 10th | 57th |
Where it was most wrong
Largest gaps between rank and result, either direction.
| Player | Model | Finish |
|---|---|---|
| Sergio Garcia | 7th | 72nd(+65) |
| Will MacKenzie | 72nd | 19th(−53) |
| Jason Kokrak | 17th | 68th(+51) |
| Michael Kim | 77th | 27th(−50) |
| Scott Brown | 23rd | 71st(+48) |
| Harris English | 10th | 57th(+47) |
| Thongchai Jaidee | 74th | 33rd(−41) |
| Jonas Blixt | 42nd | 81st(+39) |
| Cameron Tringale | 19th | 57th(+38) |
| Sung Kang | 31st | 69th(+37) |
One known caveat. Player stats, form and course history are all restricted to what existed before this event. The course archetype is not — it is derived from the venue’s full history, including this edition. That flatters the model slightly and equally at every venue. How the model works.
This event in the model
OTIS ranks every field on how well each player's game matches the course, then prices their chances. Both are published in full and graded afterwards.
This week's modelProbabilities and the track recordHow the model works
The venue
This event was played at GC of Houston in Humble, Texas, USA. The venue page carries its scorecard, hosting history and every other tour event played there.
Common questions
Who won the Shell Houston Open in 2015-2016?
Where was the 2015-2016 Shell Houston Open played?
What was the winning score at the 2015-2016 Shell Houston Open?
How many players were in the Shell Houston Open field?
Where these numbers come from
Finishes, round scores and to-par figures are the published final leaderboard for this event. Nothing is estimated or interpolated — where no value was published, this page shows a gap rather than a guess. Full sourcing notes are on the methodology page, and every stat name is defined in the glossary.