An old saying in golf is "you drive for show and you putt for dough important than long driving for shooting low scores and hence winning the top 69 money winners on the PGA tour in 1995 ar prayer is used to predict their total winnings using the simple linear regres A tour in 1993 are examined The average number of of dough." The point is that good putting is more ing money. To see if this is the case, data on average number of putts per hole for each ple linear regression model 1993 winningsis B+B, (average number of putts per hole) where the deviations E, are assumed to be independent and No deviation . This model was fit to the data using the met from statistical software: and Normally distributed with mean 0 and standard Squares. The following results were obtained R = 0.081 ; s = 281.777 Variable Constant Parameter Estimate 7,897,179 -4.139.198 SE of Parameter Estimate 3,023,782 1.698,371 Avg. Putts Which of the following conclusions seems MOST justified? in these data makes it impossible to draw any wings and average number of putts per round. rage number of putts per round and the 1993

a. The presen The presence of strongly influential observations in these data makes conclusions about the relationship between 1993 winnings and average
b. There is no evidence of a relationship hetween the average number of winnings of PGA tour pros.
c. There is distinct evidence (P-value less than 0.05) th vidence (P-value less than 0.05) that there is a positive correlation between 1993 winnings and average number of putts per round.
d. There is some evidence that PGA tour pros who averas uence that PGA tour pros who averaged fewer putts per round had higher winnings in 1993