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 (fewer is better) and the player’s total winnings for the previous season are recorded and a least-squares regression line was fitted to the data. Assume the conditions for inference about the slope are met. The -value of this test is 0.00087. Which of the following would make the -value invalid?

If the earnings for golfers with small putting averages was much more variable than the earnings for golfers with large putting averages

If the standard deviation of earnings is much larger than the standard deviation of putting average

If the distribution of earnings wasn’t approximately Normal

If the scatterplot of the sample data wasn't perfectly linear

If the distribution of earnings has an outlier