True Shooting Percentage is built on a specific arithmetic choice: every scoring attempt is normalized so that a two-point field goal, a three-point field goal, and a trip to the free-throw line can all be compared on the same scale. The formula, drawn from Dean Oliver's work and documented in the Basketball-Reference glossary, is:
TS% = PTS ÷ (2 × (FGA + 0.44 × FTA)) × 100
The 0.44 constant is not arbitrary. It approximates the share of free-throw attempts that represent a full two-shot foul rather than a technical or an and-one, preventing a player who draws constant fouls from having his denominator overstated. The result is a single number that accounts for free throws and the extra point attached to made threes — something raw field-goal percentage ignores entirely.
You can calculate true shooting percentage for any stat line in seconds. Before you do, it is worth understanding exactly what the formula rewards and where it stops telling the full story.
How the Three-Point Bonus Works Inside TS%
When a player makes a three-pointer, the numerator (PTS) gains 3, but the denominator (FGA) gains only 1. A made two adds 2 points against that same denominator cost. That asymmetry is intentional — a made three genuinely is more valuable per attempt than a made two. TS% captures that advantage correctly.
The problem is what happens at volume. A player who attempts a high share of threes will post a TS% that looks elite even at a three-point shooting rate that would be considered ordinary in isolation. The formula does not distinguish between a player who attempts threes selectively — late shot-clock, open corner, high-leverage — and one who launches early in the shot clock from well beyond the arc. Both receive the same per-attempt credit in the numerator as long as the shot goes in.
For context on how TS% relates to its closest cousin, the guide on effective field goal percentage vs. raw FG% walks through the eFG% formula — eFG% = (FGM + 0.5 × 3PM) ÷ FGA × 100 — and explains when the two metrics diverge. The key difference: eFG% ignores free throws entirely, while TS% folds them in. A player who draws fouls at a high rate will show a higher TS% than eFG% relative to his peers; a player who rarely gets to the line will show the reverse.
A Fully Worked Example
Consider two guards with identical TS%.
Guard A — 22 points on 14 field-goal attempts (4-of-10 on threes, 5-of-4 on twos — wait, let us use clean numbers): 18 points on 12 FGA, 2-of-6 from three, 6-of-8 on twos, 2-of-4 FTA.
TS% = 18 ÷ (2 × (12 + 0.44 × 4)) × 100 = 18 ÷ (2 × 13.76) × 100 = 18 ÷ 27.52 × 100 ≈ 65.4
Guard B — 18 points on 10 FGA, 4-of-8 from three, 1-of-2 on twos, 2-of-4 FTA.
TS% = 18 ÷ (2 × (10 + 0.44 × 4)) × 100 = 18 ÷ (2 × 11.76) × 100 = 18 ÷ 23.52 × 100 ≈ 76.5
Guard B's TS% is higher because his three-point volume does more work in the numerator relative to his denominator. Now imagine both players in a late-game possession where the defense has closed out hard and the three-point line is contested. Guard B's production has been built almost entirely on open threes. Guard A, who generates points from mid-range, drives, and free throws, may be far more reliable in that moment — but TS% offers no way to surface that distinction.
When League-Wide Three-Point Volume Rises
As three-point attempts become a larger share of total field-goal attempts across the league, more players will mechanically post TS% figures that would have looked exceptional in an earlier era. The threshold for what counts as an efficient season shifts upward, but TS% does not adjust for that drift. A number that once placed a player in a small group of elite scorers may now sit near the league median for high-volume shooters.
This does not make TS% wrong. It makes it a measure of scoring efficiency under normal game conditions, not a measure of shot-quality independence or situational reliability. Two players at the same TS% can have completely different shot profiles, and in tight games where defenses prioritize eliminating open threes, the player whose TS% is built on two-point scoring and free throws often sustains his efficiency more reliably.
What TS% Does Not Measure
TS% has no memory of game state. It treats a garbage-time three with the same weight as a go-ahead basket with two minutes left. It does not adjust for defensive attention — a player who sees zone coverage every night faces a different decision environment than one who faces man-to-man. It does not penalize shot selection, only shot outcome. And it does not capture whether a player's efficiency is portable: a corner-three specialist who posts a strong TS% on a team that generates open looks through ball movement may look very different on a team that requires shot creation.
None of these are arguments to discard TS%. They are arguments to pair it with context: shot distribution, free-throw rate, and whether the underlying attempts were generated against set defenses or in transition.
Frequently asked questions
Why does TS% use 0.44 instead of 0.5 for free-throw attempts?
The 0.44 constant accounts for the fact that not every free-throw attempt is part of a standard two-shot foul. Technical fouls, and-one situations, and three-shot fouls all alter the relationship between attempts and possessions. Using 0.44, as documented in the Basketball-Reference glossary and rooted in Dean Oliver's work, produces a denominator that better approximates the number of possessions used rather than the raw count of free-throw attempts.
Can a player have a high TS% and still be a poor shot creator?
Yes. TS% measures what happened on attempts that were taken, not the quality or difficulty of the process that generated them. A player who takes only open, assisted threes can post a high TS% while contributing little to half-court offense creation. The formula rewards outcomes, not process.
How is TS% different from eFG%?
eFG% — defined as (FGM + 0.5 × 3PM) ÷ FGA × 100 — adjusts field-goal percentage for the extra value of threes but ignores free throws entirely. TS% incorporates free-throw production through the 0.44 × FTA term in the denominator and the points scored from the line in the numerator. A player who draws frequent fouls will show a larger gap between his TS% and eFG% than a player who rarely gets to the line.
Does a higher three-point attempt rate always boost TS%?
Only when the player is making those threes at a rate that exceeds the efficiency of the two-point attempts he would otherwise take. A player shooting poorly from three but taking a high volume will see TS% fall relative to a two-point-heavy approach. The formula rewards made threes, not attempted ones.
Should TS% be used differently for role players versus primary scorers?
TS% is most stable for players with meaningful volume across all three scoring types. For role players who rarely attempt twos or rarely get to the line, the denominator is dominated by a single input, making the number sensitive to small sample swings. Interpreting TS% for a specialist requires knowing which term in the denominator is doing most of the work — something the true shooting percentage calculator makes straightforward by letting you adjust individual inputs.
This guide is for informational purposes only and does not constitute professional sports or financial advice.
Last reviewed: August 2026