What Would a Top Tour Pro Shoot on a Typical Public Course?

[Carl3]

52 minutes ago, iacas said:

Yeah, brain fart. Should go in as -8 for the formula.

Anyway, that's still only 20% of the time beating that. Predictions are often that they'd average 58 or 61 or something. (Also, Tour players are often not +8.)

The only data that I could find on tour pro came from something Lou Stagner did. Seemed like +8 was a good number to use for a highly ranked touring pro. Some on Twitter were adamant that TW might have been a +11 or +12 at his peak, which I thought seemed high.

I would love to get better data.

[Ty_Webb]

On 8/30/2024 at 7:39 PM, Carl3 said:

The only data that I could find on tour pro came from something Lou Stagner did. Seemed like +8 was a good number to use for a highly ranked touring pro. Some on Twitter were adamant that TW might have been a +11 or +12 at his peak, which I thought seemed high.

I would love to get better data.

They were wrong. Tiger in 2000 based on his tournament scores was a +8. Someone was putting Phil's scores into GHIN as well and on that basis he was about a +7.2. The fiddly part about calculating that is that those handicaps are based on the standard slope and course rating. Tour courses tend to be set up tighter with more rough and the pin positions are much harder than would typically be seen on a regular golf course. I think that would probably tend to push the course and slope ratings up a little. That said, I think the increase in the course and slope ratings would cancel each other out once you get down to the significantly negative differentials that the tour players post (or would if they did). To put that another way, easy vs hard pin positions will have more of an effect on the scores of higher handicap players and scratch players than it will on tour players.

The people who talk about +11 or +12 are either talking about course handicaps (the old ones where you didn't make the CR to par adjustment) or are just wrong about how slope works with negative differentials.

[iacas]

6 minutes ago, Ty_Webb said:

Tour courses tend to be set up tighter with more rough and the pin positions are much harder than would typically be seen on a regular golf course.

Pin positions aren't in the course rating calculation (and also, the PGA Tour puts holes in pretty flat spots, which isn't really true at a lot of daily member/public courses). Changing the rough height from 3" to 4" or 5" also wouldn't change the rating much at all.

6 minutes ago, Ty_Webb said:

To put that another way, easy vs hard pin positions will have more of an effect on the scores of higher handicap players and scratch players than it will on tour players.

Yep. People forget what slope is, and when it's above 113, it moves handicaps closer to zero regardless of whether they're - or +.

[Ty_Webb]

1 hour ago, iacas said:

Pin positions aren't in the course rating calculation (and also, the PGA Tour puts holes in pretty flat spots, which isn't really true at a lot of daily member/public courses). Changing the rough height from 3" to 4" or 5" also wouldn't change the rating much at all.

I know - that wasn't really what I meant though. Harder pin positions wouldn't actually affect the course or slope ratings, but they do make the course harder. If the pros played courses with the pins cut nearer the middle of the greens (I think most courses still do 6 easy, 6 medium and 6 hard except that I think the 6 easy on the PGA tour would be the 6 hard at most non-elite amateur events) I think their scores would be lower, so only taking their PGA tour scores into their handicap calculation is going to result in a higher index than if they were playing those courses in their regular state. 

On the slope effect on scores below the course rating, I was one time in a long extensive discussion on another board with a surprisingly large number of people who were absolutely convinced that slope meant the course was harder and therefore it was wrong to apply the ratio the normal way for scores below the rating. I and a few others tried so many different ways to explain it to them and they just couldn't get it (or wouldn't anyway).

Edited September 3 by Ty_Webb
added a bit about the slope thing

[Elmer]

My Home course is par 72, 6200 yards, 68/109 (which is being recalculated this year due to upgrades).

I think a pro would shoot under par. Heck, every so often the best golfer in our league shoots a-1.
However golfers in our league have played the course a couple dozens of times a year.

If the pro were to only play the course once, the 2 things that would affect their game would be:
1- the greens. They are some of the most difficult in the area. They have multiple breaks, they are fast up hill and slow down hill. They always break towards the river, no matter what you see!

2-I think a pro might be a little out of their element on this public course. Hole #1 runs along side a road, and the cars may honk in your back swing. People have been known to scream at you. Since the course is a also a public park, neighbors can be found walking (or walking their dog) along the cart path or even across the fairway!

[iacas]

1 hour ago, Ty_Webb said:

I know - that wasn't really what I meant though. Harder pin positions wouldn't actually affect the course or slope ratings, but they do make the course harder.

Smoother greens with the holes cut on pretty flat areas make the course easier, too. You're talking fractions of a stroke, anyway.

[Ty_Webb]

1 hour ago, Elmer said:

My Home course is par 72, 6200 yards, 68/109 (which is being recalculated this year due to upgrades).

I think a pro would shoot under par. Heck, every so often the best golfer in our league shoots a-1.
However golfers in our league have played the course a couple dozens of times a year.

If the pro were to only play the course once, the 2 things that would affect their game would be:
1- the greens. They are some of the most difficult in the area. They have multiple breaks, they are fast up hill and slow down hill. They always break towards the river, no matter what you see!

2-I think a pro might be a little out of their element on this public course. Hole #1 runs along side a road, and the cars may honk in your back swing. People have been known to scream at you. Since the course is a also a public park, neighbors can be found walking (or walking their dog) along the cart path or even across the fairway!

I think you'd be surprised. The pros play all sorts of difficult greens and they're very good at judging line and pace from anywhere and everywhere. Most of those little tricks that you think exist, they can see them. In addition, I was at the Players one time. It was mid-afternoon on the Friday. I wandered over to 18 tee and Ian Poulter was coming onto the tee. There were a LOT of drunk people around and one of them kept saying "water left" over and over. Poulter just kept his eyes down and walked onto the tee. His caddie gave one of the most fearsome death stares I think I've ever seen. Poulter hit his driver in the fairway. Granted that's not quite the same as a horn in the middle of your backswing, but it's not like it's library levels of quiet while they're playing either. If the course rating is four under par, they're most likely going to shoot somewhere in the 7-10 under par on that course most of the time.

[Carl3]

5 hours ago, Elmer said:

My Home course is par 72, 6200 yards, 68/109 (which is being recalculated this year due to upgrades).

I think a pro would shoot under par. Heck, every so often the best golfer in our league shoots a-1.
However golfers in our league have played the course a couple dozens of times a year.

If the pro were to only play the course once, the 2 things that would affect their game would be:
1- the greens. They are some of the most difficult in the area. They have multiple breaks, they are fast up hill and slow down hill. They always break towards the river, no matter what you see!

2-I think a pro might be a little out of their element on this public course. Hole #1 runs along side a road, and the cars may honk in your back swing. People have been known to scream at you. Since the course is a also a public park, neighbors can be found walking (or walking their dog) along the cart path or even across the fairway!

A pro with a +6 handicap would have a +10 course handicap at yours as you described it. So on a good day he would shoot a 62, but more often than not something in the mid 6-'s. I would think that very rarely this pro would shoot over par on your course.

Edited September 3 by Carl3

[iacas]

8 hours ago, Ty_Webb said:

I think you'd be surprised. The pros play all sorts of difficult greens and they're very good at judging line and pace from anywhere and everywhere. Most of those little tricks that you think exist, they can see them.

Eh, Tour pros can get a bit soft. I think it was Collin Morikawa who was asked what surprised him most when he got on Tour and he said "the number of putts inside of 8' that you play inside the hole." It may have been Viktor or someone else, but I know the comment was something like that. They're often not used to playing to holes cut on 3% slopes, and unless you're at a nice course, they're really not used to balls bouncing, or making big strokes to hit a ball ten feet (on slower greens). Players of all ability levels putt better, overall, on faster (and then often smoother) greens.

[Ty_Webb]

11 hours ago, iacas said:

Eh, Tour pros can get a bit soft. I think it was Collin Morikawa who was asked what surprised him most when he got on Tour and he said "the number of putts inside of 8' that you play inside the hole." It may have been Viktor or someone else, but I know the comment was something like that. They're often not used to playing to holes cut on 3% slopes, and unless you're at a nice course, they're really not used to balls bouncing, or making big strokes to hit a ball ten feet (on slower greens). Players of all ability levels putt better, overall, on faster (and then often smoother) greens.

100% agree that having to hit putts hard from not that far away could throw them for a loop. The thing I have in my mind though is back 10-15 years ago (maybe more) they were playing something like the BMW Championship and everyone was saying the greens were dreadful. Slow and bumpy and Tiger went on record saying it was going to be tough since you could miss 3 footers easily just because of the greens. Then he went out and shot 63. They were probably exaggerating but it seems to me they shoot the scores they shoot regardless. No doubt they will be better on smoother greens but putting is a bit of a crap shoot anyway
 

The other thing is I had my home security system updated a few years ago. The owner of the company stopped by and saw my Ben hogan picture on my wall. He told me he’s a member at a club not too far from me. It was a club I had a qualifier at that summer and I told him as much. He told me it was super difficult. The greens were so firm you couldn’t stop an approach shot and if you were above the hole you were done for. Then I went to play in it curious to see what I would see. It wound up being a fun day and I got through my qualifier (which meant I got to play friars head so that was nice). Course was fine. Could land it on the green and it wasn’t even that severe. That was partly what triggered my “you’d be surprised”

[iacas]

1 minute ago, Ty_Webb said:

100% agree that having to hit putts hard from not that far away could throw them for a loop. The thing I have in my mind though is back 10-15 years ago (maybe more) they were playing something like the BMW Championship and everyone was saying the greens were dreadful. Slow and bumpy and Tiger went on record saying it was going to be tough since you could miss 3 footers easily just because of the greens. Then he went out and shot 63. They were probably exaggerating but it seems to me they shoot the scores they shoot regardless. No doubt they will be better on smoother greens but putting is a bit of a crap shoot anyway

Your rebuttal to playing a public course green is to cite the best player ever shooting a single round score at a PGA Tour course? C'mon.

The more luck you introduce, the less of a role skill plays. The larger the stroke you need to make, the more error you introduce. The more break you have to play, the more misses you induce.

😜

You should know better than to come with that weak sauce. 🤣

[Ty_Webb]

9 hours ago, iacas said:

Your rebuttal to playing a public course green is to cite the best player ever shooting a single round score at a PGA Tour course? C'mon.

The more luck you introduce, the less of a role skill plays. The larger the stroke you need to make, the more error you introduce. The more break you have to play, the more misses you induce.

😜

You should know better than to come with that weak sauce. 🤣

Fair point. I was thinking about three things at once while I recounted that. Basically in the run up to that event they all whined about how bad the greens were and then the scores looked like they did every other week. And I was still thinking about my comment about a whole field. 156 pros playing a tournament, someone's going to go low even if the greens are bumpy - just might not be the same pro as it would have been if the greens were smooth.

To take this off on a total tangent, it obviously makes sense that the more luck you have the less skill can play a part. I remember though a discussion elsewhere where someone asked if bad greens would have more of an effect on a tour player or on a 20 handicap. The general consensus was that the 20 would be closer to a tour player on those greens. Reason being that there are putts that go in and wouldn't have and putts that don't go in and would have. Since the tour player has a lot more putts that would go in than the 20, then it makes sense they'll have more that would have gone in and didn't, so they'd be affected worse. And for short putts, I think that's pretty clearly true. But I'm not sure that it's true for longer putts - say 30 feet. From 30 feet, it's much more about getting the ball close to the hole with your first putt. If the bumpy greens puts a premium on getting it really close to the hole, the pros ability to do that better would presumably favor them, while the number of 3 putts for the 20 would go up more (that's my intuitive guess, but it is only a guess).

[iacas]

41 minutes ago, Ty_Webb said:

To take this off on a total tangent…

Let's not. That's what other topics are for.

The simple fact is that the more randomness/luck plays a role, the less skill does. It's that simple.