What Would You Shoot if a PGA Tour Pro Drove the Ball for You?

[tmac20]

OK, but I think of 20 yards as a 2 club difference.

And as a single digit hcpr, you should be around the greens on your approach too. I know I am.

The difference is that they'll knock the ball in the hole more often. Or leave short tap in putts.

Look at what Rory just did in Bermuda.... dead pulled a left handed shot near the water, flubbed a chip near the green and holed out from the fringe for par.

Even most good amateurs would not have made 5 and it had nothing to do with the drive.

And yes, tmac20, I think most amateurs would have better scores if a pro played their shots from 100 yards and in. I know I would.

Mark Broadie and his team proved you wrong by compiling this data from thousands of shots.

6500-yard course                                 7200-yard course

Am golfer	Pro-long/Am-short	Am-long/Pro-short	Pro-long/Am short	Am-long/pro short
80 golfer	70	74	73	78
90 golfer	74	81	77	86
100 golfer	77	87	80	93

[billm408]

The question is how much better we could score, and we also all know that we would probably gain distance off of the tee (in some cases a lot of distance) but just as importantly we would gain accuracy off of the tee.

True- my original point was that the difference, IME, was not as great as expected. The thread derailed a bit from there.

[newtogolf]

Mark Broadie and his team proved you wrong by compiling this data from thousands of shots.

6500-yard course                                 7200-yard course

Am golfer

Pro-long/Am-short

Am-long/Pro-short

Pro-long/Am short

Am-long/pro short

80 golfer

70

74

73

78

90 golfer

74

81

77

86

100 golfer

77

87

80

93

Broadie is showing averages, it doesn't account for each individuals strengths and weaknesses so they results won't apply the same for everyone.

[billchao]

OK, but I think of 20 yards as a 2 club difference. And as a single digit hcpr, you should be around the greens on your approach too. I know I am. The difference is that they'll knock the ball in the hole more often. Or leave short tap in putts. Look at what Rory just did in Bermuda.... dead pulled a left handed shot near the water, flubbed a chip near the green and holed out from the fringe for par. Even most good amateurs would not have made 5 and it had nothing to do with the drive. And yes, tmac20, I think most amateurs would have better scores if a pro played their shots from 100 yards and in. I know I would.

You must not have read Mark Broadie's book or research paper. The low handicap golfer loses 9.3 strokes in the long game (defined as everything outside 100 yards) to a high level pro, vs 2.2 strokes putting, 1.4 strokes in the short game, and 0.7 strokes in sand play. So at 9.3 strokes vs 4.3, the long game is twice as important in regards to scoring when you compare a high level amateur to a pro. [URL]http://www.columbia.edu/~mnb2/broadie/Assets/broadie_wscg_v_200804.pdf[/URL]

[tmac20]

Broadie is showing averages, it doesn't account for each individuals strengths and weaknesses so they results won't apply the same for everyone.

I don't disagree with that, but @billm408 stated " I think most amateurs would have better scores if a pro played their shots from 100 yards and in". I was just disproving that point.

[Dave2512]

And as a single digit hcpr, you should be around the greens on your approach too. I know I am.

The difference is that they'll knock the ball in the hole more often. Or leave short tap in putts.

Look at what Rory just did in Bermuda.... dead pulled a left handed shot near the water, flubbed a chip near the green and holed out from the fringe for par.

Even most good amateurs would not have made 5 and it had nothing to do with the drive.

I am but without fail the days I score best are when I hit the most GIR and my misses are very close to the green. At one point this season my scrambling stats for my last 20 was better than 60%. Wasn't because I am a great scrambler just that during that period my approach misses were better and it starts on the tee. The less I have to scramble is directly related to how well I get off the tee because it shortens my approach. Just one or two bad drives could be the difference a career day and limping home over 80.

[billm408]

Mark Broadie and his team proved you wrong by compiling this data from thousands of shots.

6500-yard course                                 7200-yard course

Am golfer

Pro-long/Am-short

Am-long/Pro-short

Pro-long/Am short

Am-long/pro short

80 golfer

70

74

73

78

90 golfer

74

81

77

86

100 golfer

77

87

80

93

Can't argue with the data. My opinion- and only that- is based on my one time experience havin done this as an experiment. On the other hand, I'd bet that I could switch tee shots with a 20 hcpr and still beat him 9 of 10 times. Or is that just hubris??

[Dave2512]

Can't argue with the data. My opinion- and only that- is based on my one time experience havin done this as an experiment. On the other hand, I'd bet that I could switch tee shots with a 20 hcpr and still beat him 9 of 10 times. Or is that just hubris??

No doubt but my guess is the 20 still scores better than they usually would. Couple years ago there was a forward tee experiment conducted on this site. I participated on a course that had a mens rating for the most forward tee (ladies). I dropped something like 12 strokes just being closer to the green with the game I had at the time. Which was crap, I think I was in the bogey golf range and tossed up a couple of rounds in the 70's.

[MS256]

Can't argue with the data. My opinion- and only that- is based on my one time experience havin done this as an experiment. On the other hand, I'd bet that I could switch tee shots with a 20 hcpr and still beat him 9 of 10 times. Or is that just hubris??

Ummm. No way if the 20 hcpr is typical of what I see and you are typical for a 4. All of the short game in the world is not going to save you from all of those lost balls, OB, and balls in the water hazards.

You would be surprised how suddenly adequate that 20 hcpr would look with a typical 4 hcpr's tee shots.

[Lihu]

Can't argue with the data. My opinion- and only that- is based on my one time experience havin done this as an experiment. On the other hand, I'd bet that I could switch tee shots with a 20 hcpr and still beat him 9 of 10 times. Or is that just hubris??

I was just going to suggest you do is experiment sometime. If you don't kill him in the first 5 holes, I would be extremely surprised. ;-) Edit: what he said ^^^^^

[billm408]

You must not have read Mark Broadie's book or research paper. The low handicap golfer loses 9.3 strokes in the long game (defined as everything outside 100 yards) to a high level pro, vs 2.2 strokes putting, 1.4 strokes in the short game, and 0.7 strokes in sand play.

So at 9.3 strokes vs 4.3, the long game is twice as important in regards to scoring when you compare a high level amateur to a pro.

http://www.columbia.edu/~mnb2/broadie/Assets/broadie_wscg_v_200804.pdf

Big difference here is what you define as the "long game". Everything outside 100 yards is hardly the long game as I would define it. This a skewed theory based on a simplistic theory. What happens beyond 150 yards? 175 yards? 200+ yards? It's an arbitrary definition designed to support a hypothosis, not an accurate description of how game is played.

Where are the stats that show the pros vs. amateurs only off the tees? And only on par 4 & 5 holes?

No disrespect, but this is hardly empirical data to base a conclusion.

[Dave2512]

I define long game as anything requiring a full swing.

[billm408]

I was just going to suggest you do is experiment sometime. If you don't kill him in the first 5 holes, I would be extremely surprised.

Edit: what he said ^^^^^

I'd be happy to do this and am willing to put up cash on the outcome. IME, your average 20 hcpr isn't a slouch, but a guy that can knock the ball around OK, that has 4-5 blow up holes where they tend to compound self inflicted wounds by bad decisions and the attempt to hit a career shot where there are better/safer options.

I'm not a 4 because I'm a great ball striker (although I hit the ball OK), I'm a 4 because I make better choices and make fewer mistakes around the hole.

[billchao]

Big difference here is what you define as the "long game". Everything outside 100 yards is hardly the long game as I would define it. This a skewed theory based on a simplistic theory. What happens beyond 150 yards? 175 yards? 200+ yards? It's an arbitrary definition designed to support a hypothosis, not an accurate description of how game is played. Where are the stats that show the pros vs. amateurs only off the tees? And only on par 4 & 5 holes?  No disrespect, but this is hardly empirical data to base a conclusion.

Uh yea I didn't define anything, as I'm not Mark Broadie :-) He published a book, which for obvious reasons I can't link here. BTW what happens as the shots get longer, the spread between the pros and amateurs widens. 150 yards, after all, is outside 100 yards ;-)

[billm408]

I define long game as anything requiring a full swing.

Really? A full 60* wedge from 90 yards is "long game"?

[Dave2512]

Really? A full 60* wedge from 90 yards is "long game"?

It's not the yardage but the similarity of the full swing club to club. Perception probably muddies it because a miss with a wedge compared to a long iron isn't as severe, even with an identical poor strike, because the ball doesn't have the potential travel as far off line.

[Golfingdad]

Really? A full 60* wedge from 90 yards is "long game"?

No, it says right in the paper that the definition of "long game" is 100 yards and out.  But the terminology is not relevant.  It's "full swing" vs. "not full swing."

[billm408]

OK- we're arguing symantics.

My point is that the average golfer (18-20 hdcp), playing the pro's tee shot, is still going to flair an 8 iron into the bunker or chunk one halfway to the green, where the pro is going to knock a mid-long iron onto the green and often have a makeable birdie putt.

I stand by my theory that distance is not the difference. But everything after the tee shot is a huge difference.