Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
IGNORED

PGA or LPGA: Who is Better from 120 Yards and In?


Note: This thread is 3811 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

  • Administrator
Posted
1 hour ago, pfnaas said:

... who's better, the pro men or the women?

Men are better at everything in golf, basically.

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

Posted
48 minutes ago, natureboy said:

No idea. LPGA doesn't have detailed ShotLink type stats.

Do you have any data?

I have no idea, just curious. It doesn't seem strength should have anything to do with that stat so I see no any reason for an advantage one way or the other.


Posted
2 minutes ago, pfnaas said:

I have no idea, just curious. It doesn't seem strength should have anything to do with that stat so I see no any reason for an advantage one way or the other.

The pro men are better, there really is no debate there. Why are they better? That is going to be a more complicated answer.

: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

I will say that more men are better, but I would think a few of the gals could give some of the bottom feeder guys a run for their money. 

In My Bag:
A whole bunch of Tour Edge golf stuff...... :beer:

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
4 minutes ago, Patch said:

I will say that more men are better, but I would think a few of the gals could give some of the bottom feeder guys a run for their money. 

Maybe a mini tour guy, PGA Tour has far too much depth these days.

: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
47 minutes ago, Patch said:

I will say that more men are better, but I would think a few of the gals could give some of the bottom feeder guys a run for their money. 

Nope. The women are hitting into easier pin placements and softer greens. Take the best short game girl against #200 on PGA hitting into MENS Oakmont or Chambers Bay......game over.

:ping: G25 Driver Stiff :ping: G20 3W, 5W :ping: S55 4-W (aerotech steel fiber 110g shafts) :ping: Tour Wedges 50*, 54*, 58* :nike: Method Putter Floating clubs: :edel: 54* trapper wedge

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted (edited)
On 1/2/2016 at 8:24 PM, pfnaas said:

I have no idea, just curious. It doesn't seem strength should have anything to do with that stat so I see no any reason for an advantage one way or the other.

Well, my distance stats are more in the LPGA ballpark than PGA and I hit full gap wedge and sand wedge inside 120 for one, while PGA are typically hitting partial shots. I think everyone tends to have slightly better club control with partial shots.

Plus more upper body muscle mass may translate to an 'on average' male advantage to generate spin on partial shots, which may or may not be an advantage in achieving proximity - though I've often heard it is. Ability to stick it close out of deep rough might also confer a muscle strength advantage for men.

Maybe inside 75 or 50 yards would be more of an even comparison, because it would be more technique oriented for both? 

Edited by natureboy

Kevin


Posted
On 1/2/2016 at 5:26 PM, SavvySwede said:

The pro men are better, there really is no debate there. Why are they better? That is going to be a more complicated answer.

I think it is b/c of competition.   There are a lot more men playing (or trying to play) professional golf than women.

RiCK

(Play it again, Sam)

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
On 1/2/2016 at 8:24 PM, pfnaas said:

I have no idea, just curious. It doesn't seem strength should have anything to do with that stat so I see no any reason for an advantage one way or the other.

I would make a strong assumption that PGA men are better than LPGA women at every aspect of golf, for the simple reason that more men play golf than women.  It's a much greater pool of talent to draw from.   Now, if there were the same number of women playing as there are men playing, then I would think it would be more even in the parts of the game where strength is not involved, but with so many more men playing than women, logic tells me the PGA tour guys are better at everything.  

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Note: This thread is 3811 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

    Carl's Place
    PlayBetter
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FitForGolf
    FlightScope Mevo

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

    • Day 37, June 10.  Today was primarily WFH, so I had several practice sessions (indoors, off a mat, into the net).  At least one each of U, 9, and 6-iron full swings with the usual priority.   I also tried a few times a putting type stroke with my 4H, as something I should probably learn how to hit (and what it does), but the mechanical shot at home off a mat doesn't tell me much of what it's doing.  That's something I should probably try on a real green, not during a round until I've tried it.
    • Day 10 (10 Jun 26) - Played in the midweek shootout at my home course - on aerated and sanded greens - day of trying to figure tempo to get the best roll on the greens.  Approach game was decently solid as was shots off the tee.  
    • Ok, I'm trying to find a feel to hit a consistent ball flight (irons).  My current predicament.  1. I try to do the arms down stuff better, with the club feeling like it is way behind me more. It's just a cluster of results. Most of the time, I can't get any speed on the swing. If I get my arms down faster, I just throw them out.  2. I focus all my attention on turning better. Pushing off with my left leg and getting my right side through better. On the DTL view, this doesn't produce anywhere close where the hands and club should be. The result is usually ball first contact, lower ball flight, more centered contact.  At this point, I am going with option 2. Stop thinking about what the hands do. Just make a shorter backswing, keep it wide, turn through. Somehow, the club head finds the ball. My focus is so much on just making sure I turn, it's like, "Oh, that contact was better.... Oh, that bell flight looks playable." If not, I will just be practicing my entire summer.       
    • Nope, they spent too much money. They are in over 28 million on the football roster and related NIL compensation at this point. Boosters associated with any Texas college football team has HUGE sway. The AD is between a rock and a hard place. They put a lot of money into Sorsby, at the chance of winning a NC this year. If you move on, you basically wasted a lot.  This is why Ohio State wants 3 QB's they feel can start. That is why the backups the past 5 years at some point transfer. Texas Tech has no backup near the quality of Sorsby. If they move on, they are screwed for 2026. 
    • Maybe there's something I still don't understand about the situation. Wouldn't Texas Tech do itself a favor to move on from Sorsby at this point?      
×
×
  • 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.