Could a decent touring pro beat the average "scratch" golfer, if he had to use 20 year old equipment?

I.e a Lee Westwood, Tiger Woods etc

They are using 20 year old equipment

By "scratch" golfer I mean an average club professional

Very strange question i know but I would love to hear peoples thoughts on the subject

I think the golf pro would have a chance. On any given day a tour pro can play a bad round of golf.

The only reason the scratch golfer would stand a chance is that the touring pro isn't used to the old equipment. If you took a guy like Faldo or Norman from 1992 and transported them to 2012, they would destroy a scratch golfer most of the time (every now and then a pro shoots like an 76 and the scratch guy could beat them).  Irons, wedges, and putters just aren't that much better and that is like huge chunk of the game. And they could still drive that old ball with an old driver 260+ which is all you need to be competitive.

Would that still include the fact that golf courses have been lengthened somewhat since then?

Looking at the fact during the PGA Championship PGA of America professionals are able to qualify and sometimes even make the cut I don't see why one of them who is playing well can't do better than a PGA pro because well we've seen it happen.

Interesting question, the biggest challenge for the Touring pro would be using the older golf balls and woods, I doubt the irons would have much impact on their scores.  A fairer and more accurate test would be for them to play best out of 7 tournament to eliminate the impact of a bad day on the overall results.  It also would depend if the course is a standard course or set up for a PGA Tour tournament since as a scratch golfer isn't typically playing on a course of that difficulty.

The OP is too vague. Those guys that qualify for the PGA are not scratch golfers. They are however club pros. But not average ones. They are the best 25 or so playing PGA members in the country.

1992/1993 average PGA tour player driving average about 265yards. Today's average "scratch" golfer driving average probably around 270yards.

I think the tour pro would win fairly easily, these guys are way beyond scratch and a 20 yr old driver ain't that shabby.

plus the pro's short game would be that much better

Tiger or Westwood, probably not a tough time for them. Remember Tiger has used blades and long irons for years, and would be one of the longest players on tour regardless. But he also has a great short game and used to be able to putt. The scratch golfer might score better on the par 5s, likely not getting any eagles but birdies on half or more. Tiger could score a birdie every time by laying up and simply par the rest of the holes. There are probably some par 5s he could still reach in 2, and he'd be able to hit near the pin where the pro would have a hard time even hitting the green at all. On par 3s, Tiger would be able to spin check a 3 iron with those balatas. Maybe he'd only hit it 190, but that's plenty. The pro would likely be using a hybrid from there anyway.

Now, take an elite pro from 1990, say Greg Norman, and have the modern scratch guy play him exactly as Greg was in the peak of his form, it would be a beatdown of epic proportions. I'd favor the shark by 5 strokes, and there's no course in the world that would change the outcome. Tiger or Westwood would need a couple weeks to prepare and relearn the older equipment and a pro like Jason Day who's young and never learned to play on those clubs really would struggle a bit more. The only way you could make a close match is to give the pro his bag without any chance to warm up or get used to the clubs. Every swing the pro takes would help him adapt, and would make his advantage better.

The distance issue between a guy like Tiger or Norman and a typical scratch player would be negated by the equipment. To say the scratch could gain an advantage over either man is ludicrous. 270 yards would be a great drive, a typical scratch player's average is more like 250 and they use that number to calibrate the course slope. You could even put the scratch on the next set of tees and make the pro play from the tips, and the balata balls would only help their stopping power and short game despite any loss off the tee. There are things you can do to a golf ball with a 120mph swing speed that technology cannot replicate.

Also, match play would potentially be less of an embarrassment to the scratch player, but stroke play would be easy for the pro since they live and breathe it.

Wow. Great question.

At first blush, I wanted to say the tour pro, just out of respect for the status they've achieved.

But when you are comparing them with old equipment to club pros, I also have to respect the club pro's game, and to think they wouldn't have a shot at being a tour pro with the tour pro having what most people agree is a pretty significant handicap. Club pros have pretty damn good games too & I think they would beat the tour pro if the tour pro was playing persimmon & balata.

Would they still have a 120mph swing speed with a steel driver?

This video shows Greg getting 121mph with a steel driver. I have heard Greg was capable of 130+ at absolute full power, the same as Bubba today, but there's no real evidence. Clubhead speed has only been officially tracked since 2007 so that era didn't have any steel drivers anymore. I don't doubt for a second that players like young Nicklaus, Norman, early TW, Couples, and Daly would be able to swing at 115+ for a full round and hit solid drives if need be. Norman especially; he was famous for being able to hit towering, straight drives. Given they would get less forgiveness, but they did okay and any of them could hit driving irons off the tee all day. All they need to score is a shot in the fairway about 240, even on a modern course. That's child's play to any of those players, and anyone on tour could hit that far since about 1940.

The club length of 43" makes about 2-4mph of difference to a 45 inch driver, the shaft weight could be as little as 100g, which is only 20-30 grams heavier than most pro's shafts today unless they go lightweight. The driver head would be smaller and the total weight of the club would be perhaps as high as 40-50 grams over a typical 300-320g driver today. I can swing a steel driver over 110 without trying terribly hard and I'm not used to them. Tour players, and some of the greatest drivers of all time at that, would be able to swing 112 or more, the current tour average. The longest drivers in the early 90s were around 290 average, which is a 20-40yd advantage over a typical club pro. That is an average, meaning they could bust it over 300 frequently enough on driving holes. Technology is an advantage, but it's less of a factor than the swing in this case. Even Bobby Jones was known to hit over 300 yards on several occasions using hickory shafted clubs. That scratch player would be thrilled to do it once a round using a modern driver and his best swing, with a helping wind.

Even Hogan or Snead would probably be able to smoke the average club pro in a match. Hogan doesn't have the distance of some others, but he'd hit 16 or more GiR and probably get 5-6 birdies no problem, plus the opponent would be intimidated as hell.

The only way the club pro wins is either a big aberration of performance or if they get their handicap strokes. They don't really have any advantages in terms of performance

Thats very impressive with "old" equipment

Average "scratch" golfer scores 1/5th of his rounds level or under his hc, i.e. par. So maybe 20% chance, if pro has not a good day.