Jim Furyk Shoots 58 (Par 70)

[Natural Patrick]

10 minutes ago, Patch said:

Not many players can say "I shot a 59 once, but it wasn't my lowest score". Now all he has to do is win the the tournament. 

History was made today. That being said, he has no chance of winning this tournament.

[Patch]

39 minutes ago, Natural Patrick said:

History was made today. That being said, he has no chance of winning this tournament.

Yeah, still being 4 or 5 strokes behind when walking of the last green, after a 58, makes it a bit diffucult to pull out  a win. 

Actually being retired, I forgot today is Sunday, and that he was done for the week. 

[Scotsclaff]

It's just incredible,well done Jim.

Nike should sign him up and get their profits into red figures.

Any time I've seen him on interviews he's been such a human and humble guy.

[natureboy]

2 hours ago, allenc said:

Yes, but we're comparing gross scores not scores relative to par.  58 may be easier to shoot on a par 70 than 59 on a par 72.  Could be around the same though if the two missing par fives would have had a 4.5 scoring average and the par 4s they were replaced with have 4.0 scoring averages.

Sometimes U.S. Opens with par 70s are actually par 72 courses and they just take two short par fives and call them par fours.  I don't think that's the case at River Highlands though.  It's a legitimate par 70.  What kind of courses were other 59s shot at?  Mostly par 70s I assume.

Possibly, but maybe not. Probably depends a lot on the total length of the course and individual hole difficulty. If all the par 5's are true 3-shotters and there are 4 of them it's probably harder to score in the 50's.

At the same time, any score in the 50's will be rare because there are still 18 holes to putt out on and you need an uncommon # of one-putts or chip-ins. Also how many strokes does a typical tour setup add to difficulty?

Of the 28 rounds (small sample size) in the 50's here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_round about 40% were  -12 RTP and 50% were -13 RTP.  About 43% of them occurred on par-72 courses, ~ 36% on par-71, & ~ 18% on par-70 tracks.

In 2015 ~ 52% of tour courses were par-72 and ~ 24% each for par-71 and par-70. So it looks like par of 72 may make it slightly harder to score in the 50's, but not by much.

Doing it twice in your life - in professional competition no less - is huge.

Edited August 7, 2016 by natureboy

[Silent]

Wow. Just wow.

[Shindig]

I saw the alert and the final two holes on my way out the door this morning.  Amazing stuff.  Jim Furyk and I both shot personal bests in competition this week.

I'd argue his was better.

Poor Furyk though.  Broke 60 twice on the PGA Tour (IIRC, only one other player in PGA Tour history has broken 61 twice, and that's Zach Johnson's two 60s.  I haven't followed the news today to see if this stat was said, or even accurate) and didn't win either tournament.

6 hours ago, MrFlipper said:

Hell of a round. But how is shooting 12 under on a par 70 a greater feat than shooting 59 on a par 72? Best of all time? I wouldn't go that far. 

IMO, par doesn't really matter on the TOUR, and there are few par-72s that couldn't be converted to a par-70 with similar tee placement and without affecting gross scores significantly.  How many courses on Tour have more than two par-5s that aren't reachable driver, long iron for most pros?  A change in par might affect strategy on those holes, but it really shouldn't. 

[onthehunt526]

Could've really been 56.... Just missed at 14 and lipped out at 15... I understand TPC River Highlands is a Par 70, but it's still the lowest round in PGA Tour History.

 

[newtogolf]

It's an amazing accomplishment but I don't consider it any better than a 59 on a Par 72 course.  

[mvmac]

The swing to copy if you want to hit all 18 greens, take a suck of that Hogan fans! 

 

[BallStriker]

Fantabulous!.....Right up there with Klay Thompsan's 37 points in a single quarter......great stuff

[bm85]

Jim Furyk is one of my favorites. Good for him.

[Buckeyebowman]

Think about this. Furyk is +1 going into the final day. Out of contention. Probably just barely made the cut. Goes out and shoots 12 under to finish at -11 and T4! He made himself a whole bunch of money today, and probably had a ball doing it!

I spent most of the day doing yard work, but took a break and clicked on the TV. Low and behold, even with the Olympics there is still a golf tournament to watch. I only caught about the last 45 minutes, but did see the news about Furyk's round. I texted my buddy about it. His return text kind of sets it all into perspective.

"Jesus Christ! We can't do that in a 4 man scramble!" 'Nuff said!

[Shindig]

54 minutes ago, Buckeyebowman said:

Think about this. Furyk is +1 going into the final day. Out of contention. Probably just barely made the cut.

Yup.  And that's why last night I benched him for the day in fantasy in favor of Webb Simpson, who shot a 68 (0 points).

Seriously, don't trust me when it comes to fantasy sports decisions

[natureboy]

4 hours ago, newtogolf said:

It's an amazing accomplishment but I don't consider it any better than a 59 on a Par 72 course.  

Doesn't it depend on the course? TPC River Highlands has one par 5 that's a real 3-shotter in length and one that's reachable (possibly not for Furyk). Isn't it possible that there's a Par 72 where a 59 has been shot where all the par 5's were under 525 yards?

Edited August 8, 2016 by natureboy

[Golfingdad]

3 minutes ago, natureboy said:

Doesn't it depend on the course? TPC River Highlands has one par 5 that's a real 3-shotter in length and one that's reachable (possibly not for Furyk). Isn't it possible that there's a Par 72 where a 59 has been shot where all the par 5's were under 525 yards?

I think you could make a million valid arguments either way.  For that reason, I like to think of it really basically ... 58<59. :P

[natureboy]

20 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

I think you could make a million valid arguments either way.  For that reason, I like to think of it really basically ... 58<59. :P

Yeah, I buy that it's marginally harder on a par 72 if it has substantial Par 5's, but they're all so rare that they are all equivalent in my mind.

Furyk's 58 bettered the field average by 10 while his 59 bettered the field average by 12 (similar to Al Geiberger).

Some course info: https://course.bluegolf.com/bluegolf/course/course/tpcriverhighlands/tour.htm

 

[Golfingdad]

2 minutes ago, natureboy said:

 

Furyk's 58 bettered the field average by 10 while his 59 bettered the field average by 12 (similar to Al Geiberger).

Yeah, if I wanted to get technical in comparing the rounds, this is the answer here I think.  Of course, in doing that one might find that the best ever round wasn't even sub 60.

What was the field average at the Open Sunday when Stenson shot his 63?

[natureboy]

43 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

Yeah, if I wanted to get technical in comparing the rounds, this is the answer here I think.  Of course, in doing that one might find that the best ever round wasn't even sub 60.

What was the field average at the Open Sunday when Stenson shot his 63?

Good point.

If you include Stenson & Mickelson's scores field average for the final round was 72.8, 73 excluding. His 65 on Friday was about 9.5 strokes below the field average. Phil's first round 63 was 9 under the field average. Snedeker's round at Torrey Pines was ~ 8.9 under the field.

As far as a quality round Furyk's was amazing given that he was legitimately close to shooting 2-3 strokes lower.

Par 72's are 'under-represented' among the scores in the 50's by only 10% so the relative difference isn't huge. But it is worth noting that none of the 58's in competition have come on par 72 courses.

Edited August 8, 2016 by natureboy