What would you shoot at Augusta....

[GolfBear]

Originally Posted by michaeljames92

Wow its seriously short off the members tees...

I really doubt that the stuffed shirts that are the "members" of Augusta would enjoy shooting 160 every time they they played a round.    I'm positive the course they play isn't set up anywhere near tournament conditions.    When you set the course up to Master's tournament conditions it's an entirely different animal.

Personally, I think the biggest challenge a lot of amateurs would have playing Augusta is adjusting to the slopes.   It's one thing to be a low handicap golfer on a flat course that you play all the time.  Hitting a 190 yard shot when the ball is two feet above your feet to a green  that's protected by a creek is an exercise in terror.  Not to mention that the uphill lies alone would have most amateurs falling on their backs.

[k-troop]

Originally Posted by GolfBear

Personally, I think the biggest challenge a lot of amateurs would have playing Augusta is adjusting to the slopes.   It's one thing to be a low handicap golfer on a flat course that you play all the time.  Hitting a 190 yard shot when the ball is two feet above your feet to a green  that's protected by a creek is an exercise in terror.  Not to mention that the uphill lies alone would have most amateurs falling on their backs.

That would be roughly a 45* slope, and the ball would be about mid-thigh level.  The only way for a ball to stay on that slope is for it to be buried in the rough or in a bunker; in either case, you won't be going for the green from 190.

[Rudyprimo]

I have no idea what I would shoot, just getting back into golf after a long absence.  But I think some guys on here have an unrealistic view of their golfing ability.  I think Tom Coyne who wrote "Paper Tiger" has a much more realistic view of the difference between a scratch golfer and the pros than anyone on this forum.  Coyne worked his way down to a +.4 handicap.  He competed to try and get on the tour.  He shot in the high 70's, 80's and had one round over 90.  He was not playing courses as hard as Augusta when set up for the Sunday round.

To quote him from his book, "Scratch ain't **** .  Amateurs who are scratch players simply can't play.  They are the mere masses who make up the bottom of the pyramid".

Steve Stricker shot a 77 today.  And some on here think they could shoot that score too.  I don't think so.

Being a scratch golfer is a big accomplishment and I respect anyone who can do it.  But you are not just a few strokes worse than a touring pro.

[k-troop]

Originally Posted by Rudyprimo

I have no idea what I would shoot, just getting back into golf after a long absence.  But I think some guys on here have an unrealistic view of their golfing ability.  I think Tom Coyne who wrote "Paper Tiger" has a much more realistic view of the difference between a scratch golfer and the pros than anyone on this forum.  Coyne worked his way down to a +.4 handicap.  He competed to try and get on the tour.  He shot in the high 70's, 80's and had one round over 90.  He was not playing courses as hard as Augusta when set up for the Sunday round.

To quote him from his book, "Scratch ain't **** .  Amateurs who are scratch players simply can't play.  They are the mere masses who make up the bottom of the pyramid".

Steve Stricker shot a 77 today.  And some on here think they could shoot that score too.  I don't think so.

Being a scratch golfer is a big accomplishment and I respect anyone who can do it.  But you are not just a few strokes worse than a touring pro.

I didn't hear anyone here argue that they could play on tour, or that they would win the Masters.  If Stricker's 77 was a good day for him, then he wouldn't be on tour either.

However, I'm fairly certain that if I had a great day, I could shoot 77 at Augusta.  Not a career day, and not a five shots lower than the best round of my life.  Just a good, solid day where I'm driving it well, hitting the irons solid, and not trembling like a sixth grader over every putt.  Say the lowest of the 20 rounds currently on my handicap--that kinda day.  If I had the kinda day with one of the rounds currently counted on my handicap (i.e. the top-half of my last 20 rounds), I should shoot under 85 easily.

Basically, Stricker's 77 is my 87.  Stricker's 67 is my 77.  You saying Steve-O can't shoot 67?

[Ben]

Originally Posted by Rudyprimo

I have no idea what I would shoot, just getting back into golf after a long absence.  But I think some guys on here have an unrealistic view of their golfing ability.  I think Tom Coyne who wrote "Paper Tiger" has a much more realistic view of the difference between a scratch golfer and the pros than anyone on this forum.  Coyne worked his way down to a +.4 handicap.  He competed to try and get on the tour.  He shot in the high 70's, 80's and had one round over 90.  He was not playing courses as hard as Augusta when set up for the Sunday round.

To quote him from his book, "Scratch ain't **** .  Amateurs who are scratch players simply can't play.  They are the mere masses who make up the bottom of the pyramid".

Steve Stricker shot a 77 today.  And some on here think they could shoot that score too.  I don't think so.

Being a scratch golfer is a big accomplishment and I respect anyone who can do it.  But you are not just a few strokes worse than a touring pro.

At worst.

[The_Pharaoh]

This thread has turned into the How Good Is A Scratch Golfer Compared To A PGA Tour Pro thread.

If I played my best golf I'd be around par, an average day would be around 80 and a bad day 85. Hence, my comment about being disappointed if I didn't break 80. What people seem to be saying is that my good day would be over 80. I don't think so. I shot 78 at Valderrama playing so-so UNDER COMPETITION PRESSURE. Valderrama is as difficult, if not tougher than Augusta. Check out the winning scores for the Volvo Masters and compare them to the winning scores of The Masters.

[stogiesnbogies]

I would shoot my weight.

[VOX]

Originally Posted by GolfBear

I really doubt that the stuffed shirts that are the "members" of Augusta would enjoy shooting 160 every time they they played a round.    I'm positive the course they play isn't set up anywhere near tournament conditions.    When you set the course up to Master's tournament conditions it's an entirely different animal.

Personally, I think the biggest challenge a lot of amateurs would have playing Augusta is adjusting to the slopes.   It's one thing to be a low handicap golfer on a flat course that you play all the time.  Hitting a 190 yard shot when the ball is two feet above your feet to a green  that's protected by a creek is an exercise in terror.  Not to mention that the uphill lies alone would have most amateurs falling on their backs.

Uneven lies may throw off golfers from Florida or the midwest. Those of us from the Northeastern US, Ireland or Scotland are accustomed to slope in the fairways. It is the slope on the greens that I found the most challenging at Augusta.

[ghalfaire]

I too would probably shoot my weight & I'm a "full grown" man.

[stogiesnbogies]

Not only would I shoot my weight but I'd have one hell of a time finding a caddy stupid enough to lug my bag with all those balls in it......sure hope there's a sale on Top Flites ...

the "agua model"...

[Jmdmbike]

I'm saying an average of 3 over per hole, for a mesmerizing 126!! That's with the same length and conditions they play from. Pretty sure I'll never get the chance to prove myself wrong:~(

[x129]

Without a lot of details,  it is hard to really quantify what someone will shoot. Most people do not shoot to their handicap level the first time they play the course. I imagine if you showed up at augusta tomorrow and had to play without a caddie, breaking 90 would be tough. Give you a couple practice rounds and a caddie and yeah you will be right around 80. And every couple hundred or so rounds you will shoot par or so when you have that day where you play 5 or 6 shots better than your handicap. Now we can argue about how tough augusta is (is it a 78 as GD suggest or a 79 or 77) and how accurate the whole handicap system is. At the end of the day, it is just a golf course. Play it enough and you will be close to your handicap level (+- a couple of strokes).

Originally Posted by The_Pharaoh

This thread has turned into the How Good Is A Scratch Golfer Compared To A PGA Tour Pro thread.

If I played my best golf I'd be around par, an average day would be around 80 and a bad day 85. Hence, my comment about being disappointed if I didn't break 80. What people seem to be saying is that my good day would be over 80. I don't think so. I shot 78 at Valderrama playing so-so UNDER COMPETITION PRESSURE. Valderrama is as difficult, if not tougher than Augusta. Check out the winning scores for the Volvo Masters and compare them to the winning scores of The Masters.

[The_Pharaoh]

Originally Posted by x129

Without a lot of details,  it is hard to really quantify what someone will shoot. Most people do not shoot to their handicap level the first time they play the course. I imagine if you showed up at augusta tomorrow and had to play without a caddie, breaking 90 would be tough. Give you a couple practice rounds and a caddie and yeah you will be right around 80. And every couple hundred or so rounds you will shoot par or so when you have that day where you play 5 or 6 shots better than your handicap. Now we can argue about how tough augusta is (is it a 78 as GD suggest or a 79 or 77) and how accurate the whole handicap system is. At the end of the day, it is just a golf course. Play it enough and you will be close to your handicap level (+- a couple of strokes).

For the record, it was the first time I'd played Valderrama.

[CoryMartin]

I hate handicaps. How a person who can shoot a 74 or 75 on certain courses are still considered "scratch". I personally think if you not shooting par everytime or extremely close like the occasional 73 (or 71) with quite a few rounds in the +1 to +2 range, your not truly a scratch golfer.

After seeing some of these guys shoot like 8 over, 5 over, 2 over. These are professional golfers shooting 77 or 80 or 75's. They know the course, played practice rounds, have knowledgable caddies, practice in every single condition you could think of, every lie and still shoot many over par. I would have hard time believing a 0-5 handicap breaking 90 especially 1st or 2nd time playing there. From 6 on out from handicap it just gets exponentially worse till you just get to a point where it doesn't matter how bad you are because you top off.

I play to about a 9 handicap and know that expect a bogey on two a double on seven triple on a five and quadruple on a four. (That seems like a good day would result).

So right around a 120 would be realistic for me. I know the length would kill me like nothing else and then the greens are of course "Masters Augusta Greens".

If you could break 80 on Master's set up Augusta would be equivalent to shooting 4 under on an normal course. My take.

[goodatgolf]

Alot. And that's the official number.

But at least I'd see alot of the course too. And it looks so pretty

[bplewis24]

Originally Posted by CoryMartin

I hate handicaps. How a person who can shoot a 74 or 75 on certain courses are still considered "scratch". I personally think if you not shooting par everytime or extremely close like the occasional 73 (or 71) with quite a few rounds in the +1 to +2 range, your not truly a scratch golfer.

After seeing some of these guys shoot like 8 over, 5 over, 2 over. These are professional golfers shooting 77 or 80 or 75's. They know the course, played practice rounds, have knowledgable caddies, practice in every single condition you could think of, every lie and still shoot many over par. I would have hard time believing a 0-5 handicap breaking 90 especially 1st or 2nd time playing there. From 6 on out from handicap it just gets exponentially worse till you just get to a point where it doesn't matter how bad you are because you top off.

I play to about a 9 handicap and know that expect a bogey on two a double on seven triple on a five and quadruple on a four. (That seems like a good day would result).

So right around a 120 would be realistic for me. I know the length would kill me like nothing else and then the greens are of course "Masters Augusta Greens".

If you could break 80 on Master's set up Augusta would be equivalent to shooting 4 under on an normal course. My take.

I'd be inclined to agree with you.

Brandon

[xmanhockey7]

Originally Posted by QuazerSKITS

I'm sure Monty said before that if you put a scratch club golfer on Augusta they would struggle to break 100. I cant remember if that was during the commentry for the Masters last year of the year before...

My friends dad has played it a couple times. Dad is about a 2 handicap and he shot in the 70s. I don't know how the conditions he played were different than the conditions they played on sunday but still shooting in the 70s is playing good golf there I would think.

[x129]

So in your book a +5 or so handicap is required to be a scratch golfer since they are the only ones that shoot par or better on CR 79/145 courses on a regular basis?

Quote:

I hate handicaps. How a person who can shoot a 74 or 75 on certain courses are still considered "scratch". I personally think if you not shooting par everytime or extremely close like the occasional 73 (or 71) with quite a few rounds in the +1 to +2 range, your not truly a scratch golfer.