Jump to content
Subscribe to the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
Note: This thread is 3722 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Recommended Posts

Posted

@SavvySwede I will start this for you lol.

So here is my rant- D1 and D2 college golfers, no matter how good/bad their school program is are all pretty much in the WAGR system. I think the system is biased towards college golf vs the 27 year old amateur (me). In my area, there is only two events that I can compete in without travel that would offer up some Ranking Points. One of them, is a pro event that has a $25,000 first place price tag with multiple Web.Com tour players and all your mini tour guys. It is by far the strongest field I play in every year. The second, is the Metropolitan Amateur which I will be playing in for the first time this year. If you make the cut, you get ranking points. If you don't, then you don't. It is a 3 day tournament with a cut after the first two rounds.

The other tournaments that are in Missouri would require multiple days taken off work and typically are filled with mini tour guys or college golfers. It seems as though the WAGR only takes 3 day tournaments as qualifying tournaments because none of the D3 tourneys are accepted either which are typically 2 days.

So for me to play in qualifying events, I really face some challenges. I feel like they should accept 2 day events that have criteria that you have to be under a certain handicap. Also, there are many D2 players that shoot high 70's, low 80's that are ranked, but I know a lot of amateurs who shoot mid 70's who are not. At the end of the day, maybe I just need to qualify for the US Open.

http://www.wagr.com/

http://www.golfstat.com/home.html

  • Upvote 1

  • Moderator
Posted
  GHIN0011458 said:

@SavvySwede I will start this for you lol.

So here is my rant- D1 and D2 college golfers, no matter how good/bad their school program is are all pretty much in the WAGR system. I think the system is biased towards college golf vs the 27 year old amateur (me). In my area, there is only two events that I can compete in without travel that would offer up some Ranking Points. One of them, is a pro event that has a $25,000 first place price tag with multiple Web.Com tour players and all your mini tour guys. It is by far the strongest field I play in every year. The second, is the Metropolitan Amateur which I will be playing in for the first time this year. If you make the cut, you get ranking points. If you don't, then you don't. It is a 3 day tournament with a cut after the first two rounds.

The other tournaments that are in Missouri would require multiple days taken off work and typically are filled with mini tour guys or college golfers. It seems as though the WAGR only takes 3 day tournaments as qualifying tournaments because none of the D3 tourneys are accepted either which are typically 2 days.

So for me to play in qualifying events, I really face some challenges. I feel like they should accept 2 day events that have criteria that you have to be under a certain handicap. Also, there are many D2 players that shoot high 70's, low 80's that are ranked, but I know a lot of amateurs who shoot mid 70's who are not. At the end of the day, maybe I just need to qualify for the US Open.

http://www.wagr.com/

http://www.golfstat.com/home.html

Interesting.  Thanks for posting.

Scott

Titleist, Edel, Scotty Cameron Putter, Snell - AimPoint - Evolvr - MirrorVision

My Swing Thread

boogielicious - Adjective describing the perfect surf wave

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

No problem. I also forgot to mention that they are playing in tournaments with no cut but still getting points whereas I would have to play in an event with a cut. Not just me, but a lot of the other players out there. I think that the WAGR is probably a good indicator of the skill level of maybe the top 300 or so but then you start to miss out on some solid Amateurs out there who no longer play in events that would give out the Points.


Posted

Cool info.  Can I ask - what exactly is the ranking for?  For example, they rank high school football teams, but it doesn't really mean anything - mostly just for fun - because there aren't any national playoffs or anything.

But do these rankings provide status for things?  Entry into certain tournaments, or does it help you bypass lower levels of qualifying for other tournaments?

Just trying to gauge the purpose. :beer:

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
  Golfingdad said:

Cool info.  Can I ask - what exactly is the ranking for?  For example, they rank high school football teams, but it doesn't really mean anything - mostly just for fun - because there aren't any national playoffs or anything.

But do these rankings provide status for things?  Entry into certain tournaments, or does it help you bypass lower levels of qualifying for other tournaments?

Just trying to gauge the purpose.

That I'm not sure. My goal is to get ranked somehow lol. I will let you know if it opens any doors for me at that point. I am sure it gives you brownie points if you want to get into a tournament such as the Western Amateur or the North and South.


Posted
  GHIN0011458 said:

No problem. I also forgot to mention that they are playing in tournaments with no cut but still getting points whereas I would have to play in an event with a cut. Not just me, but a lot of the other players out there. I think that the WAGR is probably a good indicator of the skill level of maybe the top 300 or so but then you start to miss out on some solid Amateurs out there who no longer play in events that would give out the Points.

Sounds like a lot of those limited field events the tops pro are using to boost their rankings. I guess the only way would be for the college system to have its own rankings and leave anything involving world ranking points open to the world. Thanks for the info

:callaway: Big Bertha Alpha 815 DBD  :bridgestone: TD-03 Putter   
:tmade: 300 Tour 3W                 :true_linkswear: Motion Shoes
:titleist: 585H Hybrid                       
:tmade: TP MC irons                 
:ping: Glide 54             
:ping: Glide 58
:cleveland: 588 RTX 62

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
  GHIN0011458 said:

In my area, there is only two events that I can compete in without travel that would offer up some Ranking Points. One of them, is a pro event that has a $25,000 first place price tag with multiple Web.Com tour players and all your mini tour guys. It is by far the strongest field I play in every year. The second, is the Metropolitan Amateur which I will be playing in for the first time this year. If you make the cut, you get ranking points.

I'm not going to argue that it's not frustrating not being able to play in events closer to home and get ranking points but just want to put it in perspective. I was chatting to a lad I know just a few days ago who's on the WAGR, he was just off to play in the Portuguese International Amateur Championship. I live in northern England.

Having 2 ranking events locally is a luxury that not many places in the world share and many of our better amateurs are regularly flying overseas, let alone traveling to neighbouring states, in order to play in ranking events. Not saying it's not a pain to have to travel, and possibly financially restrictive, but it's just the way it is. The WAGR is a WORLD amateur golf ranking system, it's not a local thing :-)

Pete Iveson

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
  Nosevi said:

I'm not going to argue that it's not frustrating not being able to play in events closer to home and get ranking points but just want to put it in perspective. I was chatting to a lad I know just a few days ago who's on the WAGR, he was just off to play in the Portuguese International Amateur Championship. I live in northern England.

Having 2 ranking events locally is a luxury that not many places in the world share and many of our better amateurs are regularly flying overseas, let alone traveling to neighbouring states, in order to play in ranking events. Not saying it's not a pain to have to travel, and possibly financially restrictive, but it's just the way it is. The WAGR is a WORLD amateur golf ranking system, it's not a local thing

I understand that. My argument is the opportunity for a college player vs good amateurs who are older. The problem is that I am playing in the same tournaments with people who are ranked but they are two day events and they require a certain handicap to get into. Why do those not qualify as events that could gain Points but D2 low end 3 day tournaments do?


  • Moderator
Posted
  Golfingdad said:

But do these rankings provide status for things?  Entry into certain tournaments, or does it help you bypass lower levels of qualifying for other tournaments?

Just trying to gauge the purpose.

Helps you get free stuff from OEMs ;-)

I don't know if it gets you onto teams or into events, there are other points systems for that. I'm sure it can be useful for recruiting and OEMs can use it in press releases, "Titleist signed the #1 ranked amateur....".

Mike McLoughlin

Check out my friends on Evolvr!
Follow The Sand Trap on Twitter!  and on Facebook
Golf Terminology -  Analyzr  -  My FacebookTwitter and Instagram 

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
I don't know, mate. My question is more why are the D2 low end events eligible for ranking points - they're not exactly on the world stage as far as amateur golf goes. We wouldn't have a ranking event that didn't bring in players from right across Europe, the idea that a Division 2 college tournament should have WORLD amateur ranking points is a bit daft tbh.

Pete Iveson

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

The rankings are also bias toward those who play in the most qualifying events.

For example my nephew is a freshman at UC Berkley and is currently ranked around 750 in the world. That doesn't sound all that good but when he was in HS he played in a lot fewer events than most his peers. His parents thought a well balanced life was more important than piling up ranking points.

Are there 750 amateurs better than he is? I can't say, but in the end, good play will determine whether his rank rises or not. I can tell you this, his coaches are more concerned with his stroke average than his ranking. I'm not sure there can ever be a perfect system to rank amateur players. There are too many variables involved.

cubdog

Ross (aka cubdog)


Posted
  cubdog said:
The rankings are also bias toward those who play in the most qualifying events.

For example my nephew is a freshman at UC Berkley and is currently ranked around 750 in the world. That doesn't sound all that good but when he was in HS he played in a lot fewer events than most his peers. His parents thought a well balanced life was more important than piling up ranking points.

Are there 750 amateurs better than he is? I can't say, but in the end, good play will determine whether his rank rises or not. I can tell you this, his coaches are more concerned with his stroke average than his ranking. I'm not sure there can ever be a perfect system to rank amateur players. There are too many variables involved.

cubdog

I don't know, 750th in the world of Amateur golf sounds pretty good to me!!! :-)

To the OP, and refering to what cubdog has said at the top about ranking points having a bias towards playing in the most qualifying events, I've practiced along side this guy a couple of times, seriously nice young lad. He goes to the academy where I'm coached for his national squad training.

http://www.wagr.com/en/Ranking/Player.aspx?playerid=6433&ismens;=True&tabYear;=2014&countingTab;=true

Anyway, looking down the list of events guys like this are entering you'll see recently he's been to Spain a couple of times, Portugal, Peru, Japan, Finland and India as well as all parts of the UK including playing in The Open Championship (British Open to you guys). He plays off about an equivalent of plus 6.5 under the USGA handicapping system. This is the world amateur golf scene and I'm sorry but D2 college golf just isn't close to it.

Looking at the below link it says the requirement to get on a D2 college golf programme in the States is a handicap of about 5.0 under your system (which equates to more or less a 7 under ours) These guys are eligible to play in events that carry WORLD amateur golf ranking points?!?! That's absurd - at that level they wouldn't get on my home club's first team or even get into our county open which is light years away from a WAGR event.

http://playatlantic.com/sport-scholarship/golf-scholarship-usa

I guess what I'm saying to the OP is, is it fair that they get WAGR points and you don't? No I guess it's not. But it isn't that events you're in SHOULD hold WAGR points, it's that it's barking mad that the events they're in do. The WAGR system in theory ranks the top 6100 or so amateurs in the world. Are there more than 6100 amateurs worldwide who play better than your average D2 college player? Try sticking a couple of zeros on the 6100 figure and the question becomes more sensible although the answer would still probably be yes.

All of the above is said with the proviso that the article stating that the handicap requirement for D2 college golf is 5.0 under the USGA handicapping system is factually correct and that if you're a 3.0 or better you qualify for D1 (remembering that this is a maximum and many will be better than that). If in fact all D2 college players are playing off plus 3 and plus 4 then I stand corrected.

And this isn't some shot about golf in the US looking after its own - the WAGR people are based in the UK.

Pete Iveson

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
  Nosevi said:
I don't know, 750th in the world of Amateur golf sounds pretty good to me!!! :-)

QFT! I don't crack the top 750 in a 20 mile radius!

In David's bag....

Driver: Titleist 910 D-3;  9.5* Diamana Kai'li
3-Wood: Titleist 910F;  15* Diamana Kai'li
Hybrids: Titleist 910H 19* and 21* Diamana Kai'li
Irons: Titleist 695cb 5-Pw

Wedges: Scratch 51-11 TNC grind, Vokey SM-5's;  56-14 F grind and 60-11 K grind
Putter: Scotty Cameron Kombi S
Ball: ProV1

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
Posted
  Nosevi said:

All of the above is said with the proviso that the article stating that the handicap requirement for D2 college golf is 5.0 under the USGA handicapping system is factually correct and that if you're a 3.0 or better you qualify for D1 (remembering that this is a maximum and many will be better than that). If in fact all D2 college players are playing off plus 3 and plus 4 then I stand corrected.

While that may be a "cut off" for handicaps most players that are traveling in D1 golf would have a handicap of 1 or better. Here's an example of some D1 scores .  When I was a freshman I was a 1 and during my junior year I was a +2. Our team wasn't that great, we typically finished 3rd or 4th in the conference. I know some guys that played D2 and they're really solid players. To win an event in D2 golf you typically have to finish under par for 3 rounds.

Not defending whether they should get points or not, I don't really care, just offering some perspective.

Mike McLoughlin

Check out my friends on Evolvr!
Follow The Sand Trap on Twitter!  and on Facebook
Golf Terminology -  Analyzr  -  My FacebookTwitter and Instagram 

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
  mvmac said:

While that may be a "cut off" for handicaps most players that are traveling in D1 golf would have a handicap of 1 or better. Here's an example of some D1 scores.  When I was a freshman I was a 1 and during my junior year I was a +2. Our team wasn't that great, we typically finished 3rd or 4th in the conference. I know some guys that played D2 and they're really solid players. To win an event in D2 golf you typically have to finish under par for 3 rounds.

Not defending whether they should get points or not, I don't really care, just offering some perspective.

Thanks :-) .

Like I said, I realise that the numbers I gave are maximums and that the cut off to D1 tends to be more like 1 handicap not 3. Our handicapping system works differently to yours and there tends to be about a 2 shot difference so a 1 handicapper over your way is what we term a 3 handicapper here - just a different system and for reasons I won't go into I much prefer your system. But what it means is that guys who are, on average, not quite what we call a 3 handicap here are playing for world golf ranking points to be ranked within the top 6100 amateur golfers on planet earth and if/when they get a single ranking point they will appear on the world amateur golf ranking (the bottom players on the system currently have zero points but had some recently).

I realise you're not defending the fact they get ranking points but I'll go further and say it's totally ludicrous. What you term 1 handicappers (and we term 3 handicappers) aren't in the top 6100 amateur golfers in the world, like I said they wouldn't even make our scratch team at my club. Not putting them down, sure they'll progress to D1 and maybe even beyond and good luck to them. But the idea that players at that level in the college system over there get ranked as the top amateurs in the world is ridiculous.

Pete Iveson

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
Posted
  Nosevi said:

I realise you're not defending the fact they get ranking points but I'll go further and say it's totally ludicrous. What you term 1 handicappers (and we term 3 handicappers) aren't in the top 6100 amateur golfers in the world, like I said they wouldn't even make our scratch team at my club. Not putting them down, sure they'll progress to D1 and maybe even beyond and good luck to them. But the idea that players at that level in the college system over there get ranked as the top amateurs in the world is ridiculous.

Are you saying a D1 golfer wouldn't make your club scratch team? Or the D2 guys?

Mike McLoughlin

Check out my friends on Evolvr!
Follow The Sand Trap on Twitter!  and on Facebook
Golf Terminology -  Analyzr  -  My FacebookTwitter and Instagram 

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
  mvmac said:
[QUOTE name="Nosevi" url="/t/80589/world-amateur-golf-ranking-system#post_1112854"] I realise you're not defending the fact they get ranking points but I'll go further and say it's totally ludicrous. What you term 1 handicappers (and we term 3 handicappers) aren't in the top 6100 amateur golfers in the world, like I said they wouldn't even make our scratch team at my club. Not putting them down, sure they'll progress to D1 and maybe even beyond and good luck to them. But the idea that players at that level in the college system over there get ranked as the top amateurs in the world is ridiculous. [/QUOTE] Are you saying a D1 golfer wouldn't make your club scratch team? Or the D2 guys?

The D2 guys. If the crossover from D1 to D2 is 1 handicap under your system, 3 under ours, then the guys in D2 wouldn't make our 1st team which play off scratch in all tournaments, most are plus handicaps or scratch under our system. No problem with the D1 guys playing for WAGR points, some are right up there, but by definition the D2 guys aren't - if they were playing off plus 3 they wouldn't be in D2. So if they're basically off handicap of 1 maybe pushing scratch under your system (like I said, 2 or 3 handicappers under ours) can they be considered as being close to the top 6000 odd amateur golfers in the world? Not even close. All of that said, like you, I don't actually care a great deal. But when the OP says that events he enters should have WAGR points in line with the fact that D2 college events do, the truth is D2 college events shouldn't do - golfers at that level are not (yet) in the top 6100 amateur golfers in the world.

Pete Iveson

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator
Posted
  Nosevi said:
The D2 guys. If the crossover from D1 to D2 is 1 handicap under your system, 3 under ours, then the guys in D2 wouldn't make our 1st team which play off scratch in all tournaments, most are plus handicaps or scratch under our system. No problem with the D1 guys playing for WAGR points, some are right up there, but by definition the D2 guys aren't - if they were playing off plus 3 they wouldn't be in D2. So if they're basically off handicap of 1 maybe pushing scratch under your system (like I said, 2 or 3 handicappers under ours) can they be considered as being close to the top 6000 odd amateur golfers in the world? Not even close.


You're misreading or something. Plenty of the D1 golfers are +2 to +3 golfers. Remember, too, D1 schools aren't necessarily D1 because of their golf team, so you could make a D1 school as a 1, but it's not likely (it's not like Mike was the #1 guy on a good team when he was a freshman).

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Note: This thread is 3722 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    PlayBetter
    TourStriker
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FitForGolf
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-20%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack/FitForGolf, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope. 15% off TourStriker (no code).
  • Popular Now

  • Posts

    • Ok thanks for trying to help me out,I'm leaning toward videoing myself,I will have my sister cam me,I gotta tell you that my swing is not a pretty thing..lol.
    • In general, don't see what is so harsh. If you don't like, it's not the law.. just make your own rules. I love vanity cappers Two additional points: 1) Most golfers are not that good: Yes, and most of them think they are better than they are. So a softer penalty would suit their vanity. No, thanks. The 'right' kind would not mind S&D. 2) Houses pinching fairways: If not OB, people would go in and try to hit out of people's yards. Trespassing galore. No, thanks.   
    • I hate articles like these. If you are playing just to have fun, it doesn't matter what rules you are following. Nobody will care if you hit one OB, drop, and then mark down a 5 instead of a 6. If it doesn't impact anyone else or hurt the course, then go wild. For competitive golf, I think stroke and distance or the MLR on OB/lost balls is fine. I don't see any reason to change it. The penalty being too harsh just doesn't register with me.
    • @Christoby - We really can't help you out more at this point. You haven't posted a swing (here or in the member swing subforum), and you haven't provided any concrete data that shows how high you hit it. Generally, you want to be able to hit it pretty high. PGA Tour average is around 100 feet, but also the best players tend to be a bit above that. The conventional wisdom is that it's best to be high with longer clubs and be able to flight it lower with wedges and short irons.  I would guess that you are not hitting it too high. But it's just a guess because you don't have videos or concrete data.  That said, don't do this: It's a band aid that will lead to bad habits.
    • This article makes the claim that stroke and distance is overly harsh. The Worst Rule In Golf | MyGolfSpy There should be a change here. Their claims as to why it is overly harsh.  1) Most golfers are not very good.  Yes, but the rules of golf have been around way before pro golfer existed, and most were not very good.  2) There are too much OB on many modern golf courses.  Maybe were the author lives there are tons of courses with housing developments and tons of OB everywhere, but I don't see it. When I played on courses with a lot of housing, it isn't crazy tight that OB really comes into play that often. So, I think this claim is not valid. 3) PGA Tour players have the benefit of galleries and ball spotters to find lost balls.  Yes, but I do not think it is consistent the further down you go the pro tour hierarchy. Also, this is just a claim to validate more bifurcation of the rules, and it's not really a good one.  4) A lot of golf courses are not properly marked with hazards or maintained.  This is true, but also the rules of golf cover this. A water hazard doesn't need to be marked for it to be a water hazard.   5) It slows down play because you have to go back to the previous spot to re hit the shot.  I get losing a golf ball in tall grass, or sometimes in normal rough sucks. If you hit one close to OB, or into the woods, hit a provisional. It speeds up play for a good portion of times you will have to take stroke and distance.  Then the articles go into a few not really well backed reasons to further bifurcate the rules to make OB less penalizing for amateurs. Basically, they want the modified local rule of placing the ball in the fairway with two stroke penalty to be a one stroke penalty. This means that OB is now less penal than a lateral hazard. Imagine if the water hazard is at the base of a steep-ish slope. If you drop there, you will have a horrible lie/stance. I think right off the bat this stance is not valid. They go into where PGA Tour players get benefits over amateurs. Things like temporary immovable objects allow them to get free relief. Courses normally do not have the stands or other equipment needed to run a tournament. The argument is very weak.  I might be willing to say that OB marked with a white stake and/or white line should be played like a lateral hazard. The scenario in my head is, what if there is a golf hole where there is a lake on the left, and OB on the right that goes down the entire hole. If you hit the ball into the lake, it is not playable. So, to me there is little difference between hitting it left in the water versus right OB. Though, you may be able to play it from the water. A lot of times a lateral hazard is not marked on the water's edge exactly. A lost ball is a lost ball. There is nothing staked, so it is hard to judge where it should be. So, stroke and distance make more sense.  Yea, I think the rules make sense with stroke and distance penalty. I would say not overly harsh.   
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...