So the difference between Koepka in majors and normal events can't just be mental, right?

There's gotta be something more to it.

hes' more a 68 guy on hard tracks vs 62 and 64's

Frankly, it doesn't make sense. Stick him in the field at the John Deere and he may or may not crack the top 25. Head to the US Open and he's winning or finishing second.

He's won on different types of major courses too. It's not limited to super long tracks with thick rough that places a premium on driving the ball.

He has outright said he doesn’t care how he finishes in these events. Almost seems to just use them as practice rounds where he’s working on something for the next major. I mean this would be the only thing that would make sense.

> @FootWedge16 said:

> Frankly, it doesn't make sense. Stick him in the field at the John Deere and he may or may not crack the top 25. Head to the US Open and he's winning or finishing second.

>

> He's won on different types of major courses too. It's not limited to super long tracks with thick rough that places a premium on driving the ball.

Koepka's major wins:

Erin Hills (bombers course)

Bethpage (bombers course)

Shinnecock (bombers course)

Bellerive (bombers course)

I dont think its an accident that Koepka's best majors performances have been at the US Open and the PGA, two majors that consistently put a premium on hitting it long and getting the ball in the fairway. I realize he played well at Augusta this year, but by and large he's not been much of a factor at the Masters or in the Open Championship - the two majors where length, while important to an extent, is often not the deciding factor in who contends and wins.

Now, Koepka probably doesnt have the screws tightened at the Travelers like he did last week at Pebble, but it just goes to show how tough and deep the PGA Tour is, and how anybody winning at ANY track on Tour is a damn fine accomplishment. Outside of a handful of courses on Tour, par is a below average score. Major champion or not, if you're not on your game, you get run over.

> @JaNelson38 said:

> > @FootWedge16 said:

> > Frankly, it doesn't make sense. Stick him in the field at the John Deere and he may or may not crack the top 25. Head to the US Open and he's winning or finishing second.

> >

> > He's won on different types of major courses too. It's not limited to super long tracks with thick rough that places a premium on driving the ball.

> Koepka's major wins:

> Erin Hills (bombers course)

> Bethpage (bombers course)

> Shinnecock (bombers course)

> Bellerive (bombers course)

>

> I dont think its an accident that Koepka's best majors performances have been at the US Open and the PGA, two majors that consistently put a premium on hitting it long and getting the ball in the fairway. I realize he played well at Augusta this year, but by and large he's not been much of a factor at the Masters or in the Open Championship - the two majors where length, while important to an extent, is often not the deciding factor in who contends and wins.

>

> Now, Koepka probably doesnt have the screws tightened at the Travelers like he did last week at Pebble, but it just goes to show how tough and deep the PGA Tour is, and how anybody winning at ANY track on Tour is a **** fine accomplishment. Outside of a handful of courses on Tour, par is a below average score. Major champion or not, if you're not on your game, you get run over.

But he also just finished second at Pebble.

> @Wesquire said:

> > @JaNelson38 said:

> > > @FootWedge16 said:

> > > Frankly, it doesn't make sense. Stick him in the field at the John Deere and he may or may not crack the top 25. Head to the US Open and he's winning or finishing second.

> > >

> > > He's won on different types of major courses too. It's not limited to super long tracks with thick rough that places a premium on driving the ball.

> > Koepka's major wins:

> > Erin Hills (bombers course)

> > Bethpage (bombers course)

> > Shinnecock (bombers course)

> > Bellerive (bombers course)

> >

> > I dont think its an accident that Koepka's best majors performances have been at the US Open and the PGA, two majors that consistently put a premium on hitting it long and getting the ball in the fairway. I realize he played well at Augusta this year, but by and large he's not been much of a factor at the Masters or in the Open Championship - the two majors where length, while important to an extent, is often not the deciding factor in who contends and wins.

> >

> > Now, Koepka probably doesnt have the screws tightened at the Travelers like he did last week at Pebble, but it just goes to show how tough and deep the PGA Tour is, and how anybody winning at ANY track on Tour is a **** fine accomplishment. Outside of a handful of courses on Tour, par is a below average score. Major champion or not, if you're not on your game, you get run over.

>

> But he also just finished second at Pebble.

And some of his best work in all of the above was around the greens. Was also T2 at Augusta.

> @Wesquire said:

> But he also just finished second at Pebble.

Pebble is also not a short course. It might be a lower yardage on the scorecard, but at par 71 with the wind up that course would have been an absolute beast. It just happened to be completely benign.

> @JaNelson38 said:

> > @FootWedge16 said:

> > Frankly, it doesn't make sense. Stick him in the field at the John Deere and he may or may not crack the top 25. Head to the US Open and he's winning or finishing second.

> >

> > He's won on different types of major courses too. It's not limited to super long tracks with thick rough that places a premium on driving the ball.

> Koepka's major wins:

> Erin Hills (bombers course)

> Bethpage (bombers course)

> Shinnecock (bombers course)

> Bellerive (bombers course)

>

> I dont think its an accident that Koepka's best majors performances have been at the US Open and the PGA, two majors that consistently put a premium on hitting it long and getting the ball in the fairway. I realize he played well at Augusta this year, but by and large he's not been much of a factor at the Masters or in the Open Championship - the two majors where length, while important to an extent, is often not the deciding factor in who contends and wins.

>

> Now, Koepka probably doesnt have the screws tightened at the Travelers like he did last week at Pebble, but it just goes to show how tough and deep the PGA Tour is, and how anybody winning at ANY track on Tour is a **** fine accomplishment. Outside of a handful of courses on Tour, par is a below average score. Major champion or not, if you're not on your game, you get run over.

"He's just practicing" for majors is a cheap excuse, honestly. There are numerous other prestigious events that he doesn't perform in as well. Was the Players a warm up? Are WGC events warm ups? Tour championship?

Edit: I quoted the wrong person here, but whatever

He says he'll just turn on "major mode" for the regular events. I personally don't see that working.

"PGA Tour players made an average of 39.8 percent of their birdie putts from 5-to-15 feet while making 52.6 percent of their par-or-worse putts from the same distance."-golfwrx

In other words, it's very difficult to manufacturer importance.

More chance for lesser players to shoot low.

Tom Watson was the same way early in his career.

> @cardoustie said:

> hes' more a 68 guy on hard tracks vs 62 and 64's

Safeway 274 (-14) win by 2

CIMB 262 (-26) 10 back

CJ cup 267 (-21) 5 back (brooks won)

HSBC 274(-14) win by 2

Sanderson 267 (-21) 5 back

Shriners 263 (-21) 9 back

Mayakoba 262 (-22) 10 back

Rsm 263 (-19) 9 back

Sentry 269 (-23) 3 back

Sony 258 (-22) 14 back

Dessert classic 262(-26) 10 back

Farmers 267(-21) 5 back

Wm 267(-17) 5 back

Att 268 (-19) 4 back

Genesis 270 (-14) 2 back

Mexico 263 (-21) 9 back

Puerto Rico 275 (-15) win by 3

Honda 271 (-9) 1 back

Api (276) win by 4

Players 272 (-16) playoff

Valspar 276(-8) win by 4

DR 270(-18) 2 back

Valero 268(-20) 4 back

Masters 275 (-13) win by 3

Rbc 272(-12) playoff

Wells Fargo 269 (-15) 3 back

Att 261 (-23) 11 back

Pga 272 (-8) win

Charles Schwab 267 (-13) 5 back

Memorial 269(-19) 3 back

Rbc Canada 258(-22) 14 back

Us open 271 (-13) 1 back

If he shot 68 every single round this season he would have won 5 times including 2 majors

BK get no ruuuuuush

From run of the mill events

> @JaNelson38 said:

> > @Wesquire said:

>

> > But he also just finished second at Pebble.

>

> Pebble is also not a short course. It might be a lower yardage on the scorecard, but at par 71 with the wind up that course would have been an absolute beast. It just happened to be completely benign.

>

>

Not long either, and even if it was, driver was taken out of the bombers hands on multiple holes. I agree the wind would have changed things, more so approaching greens than off the tee.

> @Wesquire said:

> There's gotta be something more to it.

I think that he will figure it out. Koepka is only twenty-nine, not even in his prime. He just started his quest for greatness two years ago....the legend just began......

Jeez, wth Brooks! Last time I waste a DK pick on him. Good thing I got Ryan Armour on the back end.

> @bscinstnct said:

> BK get no ruuuuuush

>

> From run of the mill events

>

>

>

Or bowling.

Some people thrive at the toughest challenges and have difficulty getting motivated and focused for lesser challenges. He also stated the nature of Majors makes them easier for him to win because in the end, the nature of the Major will eliminate the majority of the field and leave him with only a handful of guys to compete against.

Nothing wrong with being remembered for how many majors a player has won over how many regular tour events . History values the majors more.

> @Pent08 said:

> He says he'll just turn on "major mode" for the regular events. I personally don't see that working.

>

> "PGA Tour players made an average of 39.8 percent of their birdie putts from 5-to-15 feet while making 52.6 percent of their par-or-worse putts from the same distance."-golfwrx

>

> In other words, it's very difficult to manufacturer importance.

What you just quoted tells me that you can manufacture importance. You think it's more important for pro's to make birdie putts? Their most impressive putts are the ones they make to save par. You can have pars and still have a good round, but bogeys are much more damaging to their chances. The truth is pro's are able to see these differently since they make a different percentage depending on the situation.

> @Aaronwilson_95 said:

> > @cardoustie said:

> > hes' more a 68 guy on hard tracks vs 62 and 64's

>

> If he shot 68 every single round this season he would have won 5 times including 2 majors

He'd also lead the tour in scoring average. People seem to have a pipe dream about how the pro's score. not even Tiger can do it at will, although he has done it two times in 2000 and 2007 at 67.79 strokes. Nobody has even broken the 68 barrier. Closest was again Tiger at 68.05 in 2009. This is looking at the Vardon Trophy records.

> @Golfjack said:

> > @Pent08 said:

> > He says he'll just turn on "major mode" for the regular events. I personally don't see that working.

> >

> > "PGA Tour players made an average of 39.8 percent of their birdie putts from 5-to-15 feet while making 52.6 percent of their par-or-worse putts from the same distance."-golfwrx

> >

> > In other words, it's very difficult to manufacturer importance.

>

> What you just quoted tells me that you can manufacture importance. You think it's more important for pro's to make birdie putts? Their most impressive putts are the ones they make to save par. You can have pars and still have a good round, but bogeys are much more damaging to their chances. The truth is pro's are able to see these differently since they make a different percentage depending on the situation.

Why is a par putt more important than a birdie putt of the same length, or vice versa? The opportunity cost is the same, one stroke.

They make par putts because the human mind avoids loss more than it seeks gain. The par/birdie putt discrepancy displays an inherent loss aversion rather than a deliberate ability to manufacturer importance. Assuming Brooks is some anomaly whose game only peaks in majors, I find it hard to believe that he can just "turn it on". To further the analogy, can he simply choose to make as many birdie putts of equivalent length?

He's a poker pro playing at the $5 table, he can't win at such low stakes since it's easy for the assorted riff-raff players to go all out.

> @rafal said:

> He's a poker pro playing at the $5 table, he can't win at such low stakes since it's easy for the assorted riff-raff players to go all out.

He’s a poker pro that won a few WSOP bracelets and has had little success in any other tournaments.

So many errant shots. I've followed Koepka in Florida events for years, including this season at Bay Hill. His girlfriend was there. I walked behind her as often as possible, although behind her is not her best asset.

He missed the cut this year and deserved it. Barely looked like he cared during that Friday round. Shots immediately off line. Moderate chipping and putting. No fire at all.

Im other words, identical to every previous time I've see him. Maybe one time he was in modest contention at Doral.

I won't criticize him for it, other than it feels like you're being cheated while walking the course in a regular event. Rory misses putts and makes stupid decisions. But he reacts properly. You can tell he's legitimately trying.

I won't be surprised if Keopka does not contend at the Open Championship. If he's ever going to have a mental lull in a major, this is a logical spot. In all three majors he has been in top contention. Difficult to sustain that much energy and intensity in all four within a calendar year. He did pick off one of them so it's a satisfying season regardless of the result in Ireland.

More than anything, the recent major was a long uphill struggle but not successful. That is the key combination. If Koepka had won I wouldn't be doubting his chances. Just the opposite. He'd have a surge of adrenaline. But since he was in chase mode all week and it didn't happen for him, more often than not the next outing is an emotional downtick. That was a glaring tendency during the 24 years I bet sports in Las Vegas. Letdowns occur after a defeat far more prominently and dependably than after a victory. Conventional wisdom is totally screwed up in that regard.

His win in Phoenix was necessary to build confidence and get established on the US tour. That CJ Cup win was a bad move, he can't afford anymore mistakes like that. I want to look back at his record one day and see 10 wins....8 of them majors ;)

A true professional plays to win. Every time.

Just my opinion but I don't believe (especially at this level) that you can just turn it on when you feel like it/want to and win. To win only when you think it's important as in the Major tournaments doesn't make any sense to me. The talent pool is getting deeper and deeper. Winning is going to become more and more difficult.

He's not going to be able to "turn it on" at the Open Championship this year and ensuing Majors without doing so more consistently.

He's still playing to win every time he tees it up, thats guaranteed. Of course given the choice he'd take a major over a regular tour event but over time I expect the imbalance in his record to be redressed. He's too good.

If his 6 PGA Tour wins were 4 regular and two majors rather than 2 regular and 4 majors this wouldn't be discussion, still a relatively small sample size. If he reaches the double-digit majors tally like he said he thinks is possible and only has a handful of regular wins then it would be very curious. I just don't see it happening though as if he continues to play well enough to beat major fields then he's going to clip off regular tour wins.

> @Pent08 said:

> > @Golfjack said:

> > > @Pent08 said:

> > > He says he'll just turn on "major mode" for the regular events. I personally don't see that working.

> > >

> > > "PGA Tour players made an average of 39.8 percent of their birdie putts from 5-to-15 feet while making 52.6 percent of their par-or-worse putts from the same distance."-golfwrx

> > >

> > > In other words, it's very difficult to manufacturer importance.

> >

> > What you just quoted tells me that you can manufacture importance. You think it's more important for pro's to make birdie putts? Their most impressive putts are the ones they make to save par. You can have pars and still have a good round, but bogeys are much more damaging to their chances. The truth is pro's are able to see these differently since they make a different percentage depending on the situation.

>

> Why is a par putt more important than a birdie putt of the same length, or vice versa? The opportunity cost is the same, one stroke.

Not always the same cost, GMacs 30 footer for par at the last of the RBC, potential cost to most the dollars between tied 8th and tied 11th. The reality of that putt, playing The Open on your home course Vs missing a once in a lifetime opportunity. Possibly the most clutch putt of the season.

They are just money grabbing events and he treats them as money grabbing events.