How would a scramble team fare in the US Open?

[oregongolfguy]

Count me in. Ive played chambers bay. Its probably going to play hard and fast. Still gonna behind the big boys but you can figure on big run out. With a couple practice rounds. I think the team could be on the front page of the leaderboard. Your gonna almost never play from the rough. Your gonna get up and down alot. And your gonna get 4 chances on each put. In my experience your gonna make alot of putts.

[rkim291968]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rkim291968

I would think it's easier at Masters.  The harder the course, more disadvantageous to amateur golfer  who are not used to such challenge.

But for us scramble players, who can place the ball, the rough gets marginalized severely at a US Open.  No hacking out 100 yards for us.  At Augusta, the pros won't have that disadvantage.

Also, on long Par 4s (something you'd face at both courses), a group of 6-8 handicappers will struggle to make Par less than an average pro, but also will be less likely to make birdie.  The scores get flattened.  Less birdies and less bogies.  And you'd have to get a LOT of birdies to win/make the cut at Augusta.

Harder to win, I get it.   It makes sense.  But it may be easier to make the cut in Masters, no?

[ryan772]

The course i usually play is about 6600 yards from the farthest tees, the blues. I lately have been scoring in the mid 80s from here although im about a 20 handicap. This thread got me wondering so i booked a tee time at a course near me i havent played before. Its called hammock creek. Im gonna play it from Black tees to see how much worse i play.

[rkim291968]

The course i usually play is about 6600 yards from the farthest tees, the blues. I lately have been scoring in the mid 80s from here although im about a 20 handicap. This thread got me wondering so i booked a tee time at a course near me i havent played before. Its called hammock creek. Im gonna play it from Black tees to see how much worse i play.

Good luck and have fun.  In case you didn't read the entire thread, the US Open is played at 7800+ yards.

[Tat14]

It doesn't matter how well or poor they do, nobody will remember next year.

Now, if they happened to make a 12 on the last hole...

- R. McAvoy.

[ryan772]

I read the thread but its not like there are courses that large just anywhere. Its still a very large course for what im used to. I hope my driver is working tomorrow or it could be a long day

[HawkNballs]

I've never played 7,000+ before. Good luck! It will probably still come down to short game.

[ryan772]

Driver was putridb shot a 94. Tough course was using a hybrid or 3 wood on every par 4 second shot. Definately tough.

[Aguirre]

Harder to win, I get it.   It makes sense.  But it may be easier to make the cut in Masters, no?

Very possible.  I'm sort of winging it here even if I believe in the base logic.

[iacas]

So you are taking 6-8 handicap golfers at 7200 yards, playing a four man scramble. I'm thinking they would do pretty good.

I still think they'd win, and I realize how lousy 6-8 handicappers are at golf.

They'd have four chances to advance the ball off the tee. Four chances from there to get on or near the green. Four chances to two-putt or get up and down (and they'd be placing their ball, too, so the rough wouldn't be a terrible thing).

I still think they make a lot of pars, a few birdies, a few less bogeys, and win or at the very least contend.

I think Brodie got this out of his imagination to market his product.

I don't think you appreciate how insulting this is.

He's an academic, so he likely takes this sort of thing very seriously. In meeting and talking with the guy I've seen nothing to dissuade me of that. And seriously, what "marketing" value is there to be had in offering the results of a single simulation?

I've seen too many self serving researches. There things can be manipulated to suit the marketing need too easily, and too often. One of my previous companies I worked for boasted fastest XYZ computer in the world and has data to back it up.  We all knew it was not so. But I can offer my data for Brodie since I fit into 90-golfer perfectly. I simply didn't see 12 stroke improvement by hitting the best of two balls.

You're not the typical 90 golfer. You have slightly different strengths and weaknesses. I have no reason to doubt Broadie's numbers.

BTW, to the original topic, a golfer hitting two shots in a row and picking the better ball vs 4 golfers hitting their 1st shot and picking the best ball of the 4 is different.  6500 yard vs 7700 yard US Open setting is vastly different.   So, I don't see the relevance of Brodie's experiment in this thread's context anyway.   Had he run the same experiment with the same amateur golfers in US Open setting, that 90 is going to be 110 and that 78 is going to be ???

It's incredibly relevant. It doesn't have to be the exact same scenario to be relevant.

The scores teams shoot in scrambles on easier courses (i.e. shooting 55s and 56s and such) are relevant, too.

[oregongolfguy]

On my home course 73/140 6850 tips with a team of 4 cappers in my range (7.8) I would expect to be in the 50's.  Based on my playing at chambers bay I would expect to be at or slightly under par every round.  Length is going to be the biggest detriment, but again...you have 4 cracks at it.  with 4 players of that level your gonna have one pretty reasonable shot every time most likely.....Not a lot of bogies, not a lot of birdies and a whole lot of pars......

[HawkNballs]

6-8 handicap golfers are lousy at golf? That's an a-hole thing to say. Keep it classy. Wow.

[Jeremie Boop]

6-8 handicap golfers are lousy at golf? That's an a-hole thing to say. Keep it classy. Wow.

Lousy in comparison to Tour players. All he means is he's not overestimating their abilities.

[David in FL]

Lousy in comparison to Tour players. All he means is he's not overestimating their abilities.

Exactly.

[Golfingdad]

6-8 handicap golfers are lousy at golf? That's an a-hole thing to say. Keep it classy. Wow.

It's just a pre-emptive strike to the rebuttal that he's overestimating the abilities of a typical 6-8 handicapper.

Lousy in comparison to Tour players. All he means is he's not overestimating their abilities.

Right, exactly.

[HawkNballs]

Got it. ;)

[mvmac]

6-8 handicap golfers are lousy at golf? That's an a-hole thing to say. Keep it classy. Wow.

What Erik was saying has already been pointed out but I'll also add this. He's a scratch but he also puts himself in the "suck" category.

We All Suck

I suck. You suck. We all suck. Seriously, there's nothing more humbling than watching PGA Tour players hit just about every club in their bag perfectly. Now, yes, it's the range, but I'm sorry - even your best range session is not going to sniff the range sessions these guys put in.

[HawkNballs]

As long as we all suck... It's all good. ;)