An old saying in golf is "You drive for show and you putt for dough." The point is that good putting is more important than long driving for shooting low scores and hence winning money. To see if this is the case, data from a random sample of 69 of the nearly 1000 players on the PGA Tour's world money list are examined. The average number of putts per hole and the player's total winnings for the previous season are recorded. A least-squares regression line was fitted to the data. The following results were obtained from statistical software. the p-value for the test in question 3 is 0.0087. p-value for the test in question 3 is 0.0087. a correct interpretation of this result is that:

With this P-value, we have statistical evidence to support the claim that there is a relationship between the average number of putts per hole and the player's total winnings.

Step-by-step explanation:

In this case, the hypothesis test has the following hypothesis:

Null hypothesis: there is no relationship between the average number of putts per hole and the player's total winnings.

Alternative hypothesis: there is relationship between the average number of putts per hole and the player's total winnings.

Then, a P-value of 0.0087 is, without doubt, a strong evidence that the null hypothesis is false.

With this P-value, we have statistical evidence to support the claim that there is a relationship between the average number of putts per hole and the player's total winnings.

nada

step-by-step explanation:

answer: idk

step-by-step explanation: