Now on the Tour scores have improved considerably,because the guys are bombing it out their 300 plus and the fairway bunkers dont come into play.And scores of more than 20 under par,which was rarely heard of before,are winning tournaments.A round of 62 happens most weeks.
So the difference is with the Pros is they are longer than before,and there short games a red hot,as always.Phil Mickelson says that in practice for every long shot he hits,he hits 3 short ones,not suprised hes hot from 100 yards.I garentee who wins the masters holes lots of putts -
Here's the thing, the difference between good scramblers and bad on the PGA tour is 10%. That means of a person hits the number of greens in regulation, lts say 12, leaving 6 scrambling attempts. Your looking at 0.6 stroke difference betwen the best and worst scramblers. There's a reason why phil works on his short game, its because his long game is horrible half the time.
Putting is a little better, the difference in putting on the PGA tour is about 3 strokes over 18 holes.
The way you score is, hit greens. There's a reason why Tiger was the best in 2000, when he won 6 tournaments in a row, and going into 2001 won the masters to win all 4 majors titles in a 12 month period. He hit 75% of his greens. His scrambling was 67%, or 8% better than the average on the tour. Like is said, he's making nearly less than half a stroke on the field for short game. your thinking, well he must have putted well. Well he was 36th in putting that year. He is an amazing clutch putter, but it wasn't even cracking the top 25 during his best year playing. So were did he make all his scoring up, LONG GAME!, he drove the ball amazingly, and he hit greens.
Tiger woods didn't crack the top 10 in GIR's till 2006. After 2002 he didn't win another major till 2005. Since 2007, the last time he's won a major, he hasn't cracked the top 10 in GIR's as well.
Which doesn't bod well for him this year, he's near 40th in GIR's at 67%.
So tell me again how short game is better? Even for pro's the long game is the key. There's a reason why luke donald had his careeer year. He gained length of the tee, he improved his Fariways hit by a ton, and his GIR's by a ton. Coupled with his absurd putting he was able to become the money leader in both USA and European tours. Tiger isn't nearly as good a putter as Luke is, and Tiger needs to hit above 70% of his greens to be dominant. If not, then he's just a good player on the PGA tour and can be beat.