Seriously...Could you have made it to the tour?

[Williamevanl]

I don't think you understand how the question was asked. It said " given ideal circumstances and the right opportunities, could you have made it to the tour? "

I still think his post makes sense. There is something strange about how people think you can't see aptitude in golf and an extreme aptitude can only be realized after years of practice. I would think a pro instructor would recognize immediately someone that has an unnatural aptitude for the game. Put another way the OP is just saying if you had the ability to be a pro you would likely be one and you would know. I mostly agree with this.

[mvmac]

Yes but only if Mac O'Grady was my first coach just kidding...

I would say no.  I feel like I had decent circumstances to make it happen, started playing at 13, access to a great golf course, able to play almost all year long, good equipment and average instruction.   Yes I could have had better instruction but if it was to happen, it would have happened.  I got good, played in college, lowest handicap I got to was a +2 and maintained it for about a year but I wasn't in the same world as the guys on Web.com or PGA tour.  Even if I was a +4-6 you still have to shoot those scores four times a week in competition, while you're traveling, on courses you've only played a few practice rounds and need to be mentally tough.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by Williamevanl

I still think his post makes sense. There is something strange about how people think you can't see aptitude in golf and an extreme aptitude can only be realized after years of practice.

I would think a pro instructor would recognize immediately someone that has an unnatural aptitude for the game.

Put another way the OP is just saying if you had the ability to be a pro you would likely be one and you would know. I mostly agree with this.

For all we know I could have been a world-class polo player if I had started young. The fact that I've had a chance to ride a horse roughly twice in my life is counter-productive to that. :)

And given all of the things I said would have had to happen, and STILL having only a 1% chance in my case, I believe it's possible someone might choose something with a higher likelihood of success. Heck, look at Trip Kuehne or Nathan Smith or some of those guys - they had at least a 30% chance, maybe higher, and didn't go that route. It's not what they wanted.

I started pretty late in the game and was entirely self-taught for a long time. The PGA Tour is a tougher nut to crack every year.

[GaijinGolfer]

I believe beyond a shadow of a doubt that I could have.  I didnt start playing until I was 19 and played to a 10 handicap before I took a single lesson (and for the most part really am still self-taught).  If my parents had started me out in golf when I was at a young age, had I worked with a golf coach and played high school and (hopefully) college golf; I feel that I could have made it on tour.

[k-troop]

Which tour?

I know a few guys still banging it around on mini-tours, and I have at least as much ability as they do.  I play once a week and never practice (I hit maybe 20 practice balls a month), and I still manage to shoot decent scores, but more importantly consistently hit good golf shots.  I hit the ball far enough and I'm a decent putter.  My wedge game is brutal, but fitting and practice would fix that (I have been a very good wedge player at times).  Assuming ideal conditions (i.e. I didn't get bored to tears on the practice facility) and adequate time/resources to completely devote myself to the game, I would have had a shot to play at the pro level.

The difference between guys on the mini-tours and the big tour is primarily a combination of learning how to compete, overcoming nerves, and luck.  The skill and shotmaking isn't really that much different (unless you're talking about the elites like Tiger/Rory/Phil etc.).  So saying "could have made it to the PGA Tour" is assuming a lot that would have been beyond your control--i.e. the 1% that Erik was referring to.

[Beachcomber]

No.  Hell no.

[Stretch]

Originally Posted by Beachcomber

No.  Hell no.

This.

[MSchott]

Never in a million years. I don't have the athleticism to play golf well consistently. Even with lessons from an early age, tons of practice and the drive and dedication to do so, I would never come close to a scratch handicap. I'm perfectly content to love the game and have opportunities to play nice courses.

[mchepp]

Yes but only if Mac O'Grady was my first coach :-$   just kidding...

Funny you should say this. I was listening to an interview by Colin Cowherd and he asked what would 35 year old you tell 25 year old you. The only thing that I could think of was to go see Mac O'Grady and attend one of his clinics. Now with kid, wife, and work it is tough to get away for 3 days, but when I was single and 25 I could have done it. Certainly, it would not make me a tour player, but it would have reduced my learning curve and helped me to find my way earlier.

[Golfingdad]

Originally Posted by MSchott

... I would never come close to a scratch handicap ...

This comes up on all of these type of threads a lot and then the rebuttal is something along the lines of ... "you don't realize how different scratch is from tour pro" or the like.

So I set about trying to come up with that difference here on my lunch break. I went to the 2012 PGA tour money list and chose the 1st (Rory McIlroy), 50th (Jonathan Byrd), and 100th (Bob Estes) ranked players and tried to figure out the handicaps of each.  A few caveats:

1.  The course ratings/slopes of each course are the highest they list.  In many cases, the PGA tour setup might fairly be harder than that, but the information is not available as far as I know.  (rest assured, these ratings/slopes are still damn high ... most being in the 76-77/145-150 range)

2.  I used all of Rory McIlroy's rounds from the year (not counting British Open because I couldn't find slope and rating for that course) but for Byrd and Estes, I only used their rounds from the same tournaments.  (Well, I got bored of searching for ratings on my slow ass computer) :)

3. Instead of going with best 10 from last 20, I used all rounds for the entire year and took the best 50%.

4. Obviously, this also doesn't factor in things like tournament pressure and the fitness it takes to play every day and travel like they do.

Anyways ... drum roll please ................. The handicaps are:

Rory McIlroy:  +7.9

Jonathan Byrd:  +4.8

Bob Estes:   +6.2

Random notes:  In 50 rounds, Rory shot above the course handicap 3 times.  Byrd twice in 36 rounds, and Estes once in 28 rounds.

Wow.

[Beachcomber]

Originally Posted by Golfingdad

This comes up on all of these type of threads a lot and then the rebuttal is something along the lines of ... "you don't realize how different scratch is from tour pro" or the like.

So I set about trying to come up with that difference here on my lunch break. I went to the 2012 PGA tour money list and chose the 1st (Rory McIlroy), 50th (Jonathan Byrd), and 100th (Bob Estes) ranked players and tried to figure out the handicaps of each.  A few caveats:

1.  The course ratings/slopes of each course are the highest they list.  In many cases, the PGA tour setup might fairly be harder than that, but the information is not available as far as I know.  (rest assured, these ratings/slopes are still damn high ... most being in the 76-77/145-150 range)

2.  I used all of Rory McIlroy's rounds from the year (not counting British Open because I couldn't find slope and rating for that course) but for Byrd and Estes, I only used their rounds from the same tournaments.  (Well, I got bored of searching for ratings on my slow ass computer) :)

3. Instead of going with best 10 from last 20, I used all rounds for the entire year and took the best 50%.

4. Obviously, this also doesn't factor in things like tournament pressure and the fitness it takes to play every day and travel like they do.

Anyways ... drum roll please ................. The handicaps are:

Rory McIlroy:  +7.9

Jonathan Byrd:  +4.8

Bob Estes:   +6.2

Random notes:  In 50 rounds, Rory shot above the course handicap 3 times.  Byrd twice in 36 rounds, and Estes once in 28 rounds.

Wow.

Wow is right!  Stop these threads people.  These guys are playing golf on another planet... They are out of this world good to be on tour.  Bob Estes a +6.2.  Hhahaha insane.

[dennyjones]

Only on TV!   Most people aren't flexible enough or in shape to travel and play each week without a doctor, medicine or a chiropractor.

[cooke119]

No, don't have the hand eye coordination and had my first back surgery at 21 years of age.

[Harmonious]

Originally Posted by Beachcomber

Wow is right!  Stop these threads people.  These guys are playing golf on another planet... They are out of this world good to be on tour.  Bob Estes a +6.2.  Hhahaha insane.

Which isn't being debated. But that wasn't the OP's original question. He posed the question whether, given the ideal golf upbringing (instruction, equipment, money for tournaments, encouraging parents, etc.) , do any ST members think they could have had a chance to go on tour. The question was not whether any ST members could play on tour today.

[Golfingdad]

Which isn't being debated. But that wasn't the OP's original question. He posed the question whether, given the ideal golf upbringing (instruction, equipment, money for tournaments, encouraging parents, etc.) , do any ST members think they could have had a chance to go on tour. The question was not whether any ST members could play on tour today.

And my intent wasn't to start a debate either. Just adding a little more perspective/information. To be fair, there are plenty of PGA tour golfers "worse" than bob Estes too. :)

[nevets88]

About the same percentages as:

becoming a renowned concert pianist

becoming a MacArthur Fellow

winning a Fields Medal

0.000%

[sacm3bill]

Originally Posted by Harmonious

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beachcomber

Wow is right!  Stop these threads people.  These guys are playing golf on another planet... They are out of this world good to be on tour.  Bob Estes a +6.2.  Hhahaha insane.

Which isn't being debated. But that wasn't the OP's original question. He posed the question whether, given the ideal golf upbringing (instruction, equipment, money for tournaments, encouraging parents, etc.) , do any ST members think they could have had a chance to go on tour. The question was not whether any ST members could play on tour today.

I thought Golfingdad's post was appropriate in the context of underlining what it really means to be good enough to play at PGA Tour levels.

[CraiginKSA]

Yes, I am mostly interested in the individual.  For instance RayG's story is very compelling.  He had people who were actually going to commit funding for his shot at the show and he ultimately turned it down because he loved his current job.  Also, there are several on this board who are playing off very low handicaps who literally picked up a club and started making great swings.  I like reading about what the factors were that made them decide that a career in golf was not for them.

This all came about this Christmas while I was home visiting my family.  My daughter was a very good gymnast when she was young.  Well, we signed her up for Bela Karoli's gymnastics camp one year.  She got there and was watching some girls who were only a couple of years older than her, but were so much better!!  She realized right then that she wasn't going to the Olympics.  And she was fine with that.  BTW, the girls that were working out that day were Kim Zmeskal, Betty Okino and Dominic Mocianu (sp).

Bottom line, it's ok to have a dream, but have a fall back plan (she's an attorney in OK now).  I knew pretty early on that I wasn't going to be a professional athlete.  But niether are millions of other people!