If "The difference between a Tour pro and a scratch is 15 strokes" then....

[Thayneil]

Tour pros are probably closer to 8 shots better than the scratch on average.

 

A pro in Thailand keeps his scores both Tournament and casual in a recognised usga type system.

 

He is Asian Tour fairly well up comfortably keeping his card

 

He is currently plus 5.3

[Shilgy]

Tour pros are probably closer to 8 shots better than the scratch on average.

 

A pro in Thailand keeps his scores both Tournament and casual in a recognised usga type system.

 

He is Asian Tour fairly well up comfortably keeping his card

 

He is currently plus 5.3

Depends on what and how scores are being posted. Currently at Whisper Rock Paul Casey is listed at +5.2 and Aaron Baddeley at +5.9. I like Bads but are you betting on him when giving a shot in that match up?

[FootWedge16]

Tour pros are probably closer to 8 shots better than the scratch on average.

 

A pro in Thailand keeps his scores both Tournament and casual in a recognised usga type system.

 

He is Asian Tour fairly well up comfortably keeping his card

 

He is currently plus 5.3

Depends on what and how scores are being posted. Currently at Whisper Rock Paul Casey is listed at +5.2 and Aaron Baddeley at +5.9. I like Bads but are you betting on him when giving a shot in that match up?

 

I wouldn't bet on Baddeley to hit the ocean from the beach.

[Shilgy]

Tour pros are probably closer to 8 shots better than the scratch on average.

 

A pro in Thailand keeps his scores both Tournament and casual in a recognised usga type system.

 

He is Asian Tour fairly well up comfortably keeping his card

 

He is currently plus 5.3

Depends on what and how scores are being posted. Currently at Whisper Rock Paul Casey is listed at +5.2 and Aaron Baddeley at +5.9. I like Bads but are you betting on him when giving a shot in that match up?

 

I wouldn't bet on Baddeley to hit the ocean from the beach.

Then he did really good to finish t4 a couple weeks ago.

[dustin.shafer]

Didn't play with Monty, unfortunately. Have played a bunch with Goydos and Pernice over the years.

 

Friday we played at Victoria Club in Riverside. It's a 1923 Max Behr (re)design. Very quirky and fun. Greens receptive, but lots of break. Course has five par-5's and five par-3's. 6500 yards, 71.3, 129. Pernice had not played it before, most of us had played it anywhere from a bunch of times to a few times.

 

We played there because our home course had a ladies event. It was also a practice round for a several of us (not Pernice) because we had a tournament at Victoria on the weekend. Pernice had lots of bets (as usual) and grinded like he always does. Guy is just a pro.

 

Scores were:

 

Pernice: 69

+2 Am: 69

+1 Am: 70

4 Am: 72

Pro: 72

2 Am: 72

0 Am: 73

0 Am: 73

1 Am: 74

Obee: 74

2 Am: 75

+3 Am: 77

0 Am: 78

 

I had an off day on Friday and did not play well at all. Followed that up with back to back 70's on Saturday and Sunday in the tournament and my partner fired 72, 68 good for better-ball 64, 64 which had us finish at 2nd place, one back of the winners. Always enjoy playing Victoria Club.

 

Make of that what you will, but that's quite standard when we play with the top Champions Tour guys. Sometimes one or two of us will beat them, but usually they are within the top couple scores all the time. The easier the course (and Victoria is only 6517, 71.3/129), the more bunched the scores are and the better chance a scratch or below am has of beating a pro. The tougher the course, the more it will test ALL of one's game, and that's where the pros really separate themselves from good ams.

 

During the tournament, we played the course a bit shorter and there was a 7-under 65 by a 0. I would expect Pernice's "live-in" range to be 64 to 68 there. Mine is 69 to 74.

 

Make of that what you will. I just think it's valuable to give real-world examples of pros playing with ams -- especially a pro like Pernice who never "messes around" when he's playing golf. Goydos is the same way. Both guys are just consummate professionals.

 

Feel free to ask questions. I love talking about these rounds. By the way, Pernice is now almost 60 years old and you would NEVER know it. Guy is in fantastic shape and is still top-20(ish) in the world on the Champions Tour. Amazing how long these guys have been able to extend their careers.

 

Too bad you cant live in the 68-74 range during The Champagne :)

[Obee]

Didn't play with Monty, unfortunately. Have played a bunch with Goydos and Pernice over the years.

 

Friday we played at Victoria Club in Riverside. It's a 1923 Max Behr (re)design. Very quirky and fun. Greens receptive, but lots of break. Course has five par-5's and five par-3's. 6500 yards, 71.3, 129. Pernice had not played it before, most of us had played it anywhere from a bunch of times to a few times.

 

We played there because our home course had a ladies event. It was also a practice round for a several of us (not Pernice) because we had a tournament at Victoria on the weekend. Pernice had lots of bets (as usual) and grinded like he always does. Guy is just a pro.

 

Scores were:

 

Pernice: 69

+2 Am: 69

+1 Am: 70

4 Am: 72

Pro: 72

2 Am: 72

0 Am: 73

0 Am: 73

1 Am: 74

Obee: 74

2 Am: 75

+3 Am: 77

0 Am: 78

 

I had an off day on Friday and did not play well at all. Followed that up with back to back 70's on Saturday and Sunday in the tournament and my partner fired 72, 68 good for better-ball 64, 64 which had us finish at 2nd place, one back of the winners. Always enjoy playing Victoria Club.

 

Make of that what you will, but that's quite standard when we play with the top Champions Tour guys. Sometimes one or two of us will beat them, but usually they are within the top couple scores all the time. The easier the course (and Victoria is only 6517, 71.3/129), the more bunched the scores are and the better chance a scratch or below am has of beating a pro. The tougher the course, the more it will test ALL of one's game, and that's where the pros really separate themselves from good ams.

 

During the tournament, we played the course a bit shorter and there was a 7-under 65 by a 0. I would expect Pernice's "live-in" range to be 64 to 68 there. Mine is 69 to 74.

 

Make of that what you will. I just think it's valuable to give real-world examples of pros playing with ams -- especially a pro like Pernice who never "messes around" when he's playing golf. Goydos is the same way. Both guys are just consummate professionals.

 

Feel free to ask questions. I love talking about these rounds. By the way, Pernice is now almost 60 years old and you would NEVER know it. Guy is in fantastic shape and is still top-20(ish) in the world on the Champions Tour. Amazing how long these guys have been able to extend their careers.

 

Too bad you cant live in the 68-74 range during The Champagne :)

 

Yeah, Red Hill ain't Victoria. LOL!

[dustin.shafer]

Didn't play with Monty, unfortunately. Have played a bunch with Goydos and Pernice over the years.

 

Friday we played at Victoria Club in Riverside. It's a 1923 Max Behr (re)design. Very quirky and fun. Greens receptive, but lots of break. Course has five par-5's and five par-3's. 6500 yards, 71.3, 129. Pernice had not played it before, most of us had played it anywhere from a bunch of times to a few times.

 

We played there because our home course had a ladies event. It was also a practice round for a several of us (not Pernice) because we had a tournament at Victoria on the weekend. Pernice had lots of bets (as usual) and grinded like he always does. Guy is just a pro.

 

Scores were:

 

Pernice: 69

+2 Am: 69

+1 Am: 70

4 Am: 72

Pro: 72

2 Am: 72

0 Am: 73

0 Am: 73

1 Am: 74

Obee: 74

2 Am: 75

+3 Am: 77

0 Am: 78

 

I had an off day on Friday and did not play well at all. Followed that up with back to back 70's on Saturday and Sunday in the tournament and my partner fired 72, 68 good for better-ball 64, 64 which had us finish at 2nd place, one back of the winners. Always enjoy playing Victoria Club.

 

Make of that what you will, but that's quite standard when we play with the top Champions Tour guys. Sometimes one or two of us will beat them, but usually they are within the top couple scores all the time. The easier the course (and Victoria is only 6517, 71.3/129), the more bunched the scores are and the better chance a scratch or below am has of beating a pro. The tougher the course, the more it will test ALL of one's game, and that's where the pros really separate themselves from good ams.

 

During the tournament, we played the course a bit shorter and there was a 7-under 65 by a 0. I would expect Pernice's "live-in" range to be 64 to 68 there. Mine is 69 to 74.

 

Make of that what you will. I just think it's valuable to give real-world examples of pros playing with ams -- especially a pro like Pernice who never "messes around" when he's playing golf. Goydos is the same way. Both guys are just consummate professionals.

 

Feel free to ask questions. I love talking about these rounds. By the way, Pernice is now almost 60 years old and you would NEVER know it. Guy is in fantastic shape and is still top-20(ish) in the world on the Champions Tour. Amazing how long these guys have been able to extend their careers.

 

Too bad you cant live in the 68-74 range during The Champagne :)

 

Yeah, Red Hill ain't Victoria. LOL!

 

Ha Ha aint that the truth...

 

You playing Thurs and Sat for Bear this season?

[Obee]

Neither. I'm actually moving to Victoria. Going through the process now.

[Pure745]

Neither. I'm actually moving to Victoria. Going through the process now.

 

Do the 3 for 1 at Dove like the rest of your buddies.. Buy one get 2 free! :cheesy: :cheesy: :cheesy: :cheesy: :cheesy:

[Obee]

Neither. I'm actually moving to Victoria. Going through the process now.

 

Do the 3 for 1 at Dove like the rest of your buddies.. Buy one get 2 free! :cheesy: :cheesy: :cheesy: :cheesy: :cheesy:

 

Too far away. Time to be a local boy. :-)

[RDD]

It’s not 15 shots.

[DeeBee30]

Good discussion. One thing I haven't seen mentioned is how many strokes are nullified when you take out some of the tangible factors a pro has going for him over a scratch am and make them play the way a typical scratch might play:

 

1. Course familiarity - put both on a neutral (but tough) course that neither is intimately familiar with (not Bethpage in US Open conditions, but not a muni track: something like TPC Deere Run, Pebble, Torrey North, Kapalua Plantation, Conway Farms, etc.)

2. Green reading books - remove them from the equation and make them both read the greens themselves

3. Caddies - only provide caddies to carry clubs; no on-course consultation on wind, elevation, greens, etc.

 

 

Now, before I get flamed, I'm not suggesting a pro can't gauge wind or read greens - they did it growing up before they turned pro. What I am saying is that if we assume a pro is something like +6, wouldn't some of those strokes (2-4?) be attributed to the knowledge they have through on-course experience, knowing all the yardages and angles green-reading guides?

 

Take those away, and while the pro still wins, I think the gap is smaller.

 

OK - let the flaming begin...

[farmer]

The scratch player also benefits from familiarity and assuming a pretty neutral CR, averages, what, 75? Put them on Obee's course from the tips, a very difficult course, and the scratch gets blistered. The tour pro might get some advantage with the green books and caddie advice, but it is not 2-4 shots per round.

[lowheel]

Tour pros are probably closer to 8 shots better than the scratch on average.

 

A pro in Thailand keeps his scores both Tournament and casual in a recognised usga type system.

 

He is Asian Tour fairly well up comfortably keeping his card

 

He is currently plus 5.3

Depends on what and how scores are being posted. Currently at Whisper Rock Paul Casey is listed at +5.2 and Aaron Baddeley at +5.9. I like Bads but are you betting on him when giving a shot in that match up?

 

Depends on the course.One is a riduculous putter one is a ridiculous ball striker. they get it done differently

[DeeBee30]

Farmer, I understand your point, but you don’t think those green books or having played the course multiple times before help pros sink a couple of putts that might otherwise miss? There’s a reason they all pay to have them during the round.

[EKELLY]

LET'S start with a scratch that can ACTUALLY play to scratch in the presence of a PGA Tour/Champions Tour player??? Right there alone you just eliminated 75% of the "alleged" scratches out there........I'm a +2 and change, even I'll admit I'm probably a 1 around my little circle of A players, which occasionally includes a few guys some of you have heard of that CAN'T stay on the Champions Tour......

[farmer]

Farmer, I understand your point, but you don’t think those green books or having played the course multiple times before help pros sink a couple of putts that might otherwise miss? There’s a reason they all pay to have them during the round.

Familiarity probably works more to the amateur scratch than it does to a tour player. Tour players play a regular event course once a year. Scratch players at that course play it many times, and not generally in tournament trim. The greens books and familiarity probably makes a difference occasionally, but not a shot per round. Andrew Landry was 125th in scoring avg in 2018. If he dropped one shot, he would have been 24th.

[MtlJeff]

LET'S start with a scratch that can ACTUALLY play to scratch in the presence of a PGA Tour/Champions Tour player??? Right there alone you just eliminated 75% of the "alleged" scratches out there........I'm a +2 and change, even I'll admit I'm probably a 1 around my little circle of A players, which occasionally includes a few guys some of you have heard of that CAN'T stay on the Champions Tour......

 

Why is there always an assumption in these threads that most scratches are liars?

 

I've known vanity caps but probably 95% of the people I know of all abilities enter their scores properly

 

 

 

 

[farmer]

Jeff, if I've given the impression that I think scratch players are lying, I apologize. The only posters I have a problem with is the 14 hdcp who is a superb ball striker, but chips and putts while (apparently) wearing welding gloves.

[MtlJeff]

Jeff, if I've given the impression that I think scratch players are lying, I apologize. The only posters I have a problem with is the 14 hdcp who is a superb ball striker, but chips and putts while (apparently) wearing welding gloves.

 

All good man no worries, I just didn't like the quotation marks in the post I quoted. Like why are scratches "alleged" scratches.

 

See it a lot in these threads, like every scratch is a vanity cap, one-course- playing chump who shoots 93 the second he has to count scores.

 

I know a good 40-50 guys between +3 and say, 2. And I don't think any more than maybe 2-3 of them fit the "alleged" label

[playar32]

What would be the stats if you broke it out per hole, or birdies/pars/bogies.

 

Handicaps are conceived from 20 rounds, or 360. What does a scratch do over those holes that a pro doesn't? Do they make the same amount of birdies, or it is more that scratch players have ~5 triples over 360 holes, and pros only have like 1.

[jll62]

Farmer, I understand your point, but you don’t think those green books or having played the course multiple times before help pros sink a couple of putts that might otherwise miss? There’s a reason they all pay to have them during the round.

 

The books are great, but they are not the magic bullet some people seem to think they are. I played my state amateur with a green book this year. During my practice round and the three tournament rounds, I'd say you could directly attribute a grand total of two extra putts made due to the book. Those were the only two instances where I changed my read based on what the book said and made the putt. In all other cases, the book simply helped confirm what I already thought. Even for someone who uses AimPoint Express like myself, having slope percentages in the book doesn't give you the read because you're almost never putting down a consistent line. You're always putting across/up/down slopes of different value. It's easier to get the number by just doing the Express read directly.

 

Why does every pro have one? Because when you're playing for as much money as they are, you'd be a fool to pass on having the best information possible. If you took them away, scoring averages would change only marginally, if at all.

[farmer]

What would be the stats if you broke it out per hole, or birdies/pars/bogies.

 

Handicaps are conceived from 20 rounds, or 360. What does a scratch do over those holes that a pro doesn't? Do they make the same amount of birdies, or it is more that scratch players have ~5 triples over 360 holes, and pros only have like 1.

The pro hits it better, drives it better, hits more greens, is closer to the hole, chips better, putts better, is better at recovery shots and has a better mental game. Other than that, there's not a lot of difference.

[Obee]

Farmer, I understand your point, but you don’t think those green books or having played the course multiple times before help pros sink a couple of putts that might otherwise miss? There’s a reason they all pay to have them during the round.

 

The books are great, but they are not the magic bullet some people seem to think they are. I played my state amateur with a green book this year. During my practice round and the three tournament rounds, I'd say you could directly attribute a grand total of two extra putts made due to the book. Those were the only two instances where I changed my read based on what the book said and made the putt. In all other cases, the book simply helped confirm what I already thought. Even for someone who uses AimPoint Express like myself, having slope percentages in the book doesn't give you the read because you're almost never putting down a consistent line. You're always putting across/up/down slopes of different value. It's easier to get the number by just doing the Express read directly.

 

Why does every pro have one? Because when you're playing for as much money as they are, you'd be a fool to pass on having the best information possible. If you took them away, scoring averages would change only marginally, if at all.

 

More than anything, I think the green books help on pitching, chipping, and also helping to NOT 3-putt. I agree that they don't help you make a bunch more putts.

[DeeBee30]

Farmer, I understand your point, but you don’t think those green books or having played the course multiple times before help pros sink a couple of putts that might otherwise miss? There’s a reason they all pay to have them during the round.

 

The books are great, but they are not the magic bullet some people seem to think they are. I played my state amateur with a green book this year. During my practice round and the three tournament rounds, I'd say you could directly attribute a grand total of two extra putts made due to the book. Those were the only two instances where I changed my read based on what the book said and made the putt. In all other cases, the book simply helped confirm what I already thought. Even for someone who uses AimPoint Express like myself, having slope percentages in the book doesn't give you the read because you're almost never putting down a consistent line. You're always putting across/up/down slopes of different value. It's easier to get the number by just doing the Express read directly.

 

Why does every pro have one? Because when you're playing for as much money as they are, you'd be a fool to pass on having the best information possible. If you took them away, scoring averages would change only marginally, if at all.

 

More than anything, I think the green books help on pitching, chipping, and also helping to NOT 3-putt. I agree that they don't help you make a bunch more putts.

 

Obee - wouldn't getting help with putt/stroke avoidance (avoiding a 3-putt) essentially have the same value as getting help making a putt? The net effect of each would be to reduce the score on a hole by 1.

 

Serious question...not stoking the fire.

[AC168]

A lot depends on course set up also. Harder, longer, US Open set ups spread the top players from scratch while shorter, easier courses where everyone can reach par 5s in 2 bunches scores together.

[BNGL]

So no science to this at all, but I played 4 rounds the last couple days with boysp. That includes a two time PGA Tour champion (within the past 4 years) a former national professional club champion (perennial PGA championship invitee), a former challenge tour winner now European Tour player, and myself (players 1,2,3&4 respectively). I’d like to preface by saying that I have chimed in earlier to say it’s no where near 15 shots, except maybe at a tough tour event over four rounds but not for a single round. Maybe I’m wrong and I have zero idea what scratch is, to be quite honest I don’t I have always just played off scratch which I thought was zero myself, reason being is I never established a USGA handicap past high school.

 

. Played a round at Bears Club , Loxahatchee Club, and two at my club.

 

Player 1 Scores- 69-68-67-65 269(-19)

Player 2 Scores 73-71-67-67 282(-10)

Player 3 Scores 71-71-68-73 283(-5)

Player 4 Scores 74-70-65-66 275(-13)

 

Note players 1 and 3 never have played my work club before while player 2 and 4 have so little bit of home course advantage. We had all played the first two clubs once or twice before..

 

What do these scores tell anyone? I guess nothing just thought I’d share real numbers. Player 3 simply ran out of gas, shot 3 over the back nine in the last round. Meanwhile playing a familiar track,, allowed me to make up ground. Meanwhile our PGA Tour winner simply picked the shorter holes apart with ease, (he’s not long 3rd longest of 4) but he was near the top of the Tours scrambling and putting categories. Which is ultimately what matters. Player two has a terrific all around game and could (has) made various runs at the PGA Tour with some success (much to the chagrin of some PGA members...).

 

I still standby my first post for one round, it’s not fifteen shots no way a scratch player is shooting in the 80s. But for a four round event it’s very possible

[golfandfishing]

BNGL I also agree it’s not 15 shots but it also appears that no one in your group is “scratch” - a 0 handicap. It’s just not that tough to get to 0. On a course like yours 10 scores of the last 20 at 73 as a low and 77 as a high with 8 other rounds in between gets a guy to scratch. The other 10 scores can be anything - 80, 84, 79, whatever. You are a plus handicap for sure, whether you keep one or not. A scratch golfer is a zero handicap, it’s as much of a math equation as it is scoring ability. Your group is far better than scratch, but agree it’s not a 15 shot spread unless you put a scratch golfer on the 1st tee of say, the PGA Championship where he is going to post 83 and plenty of guys go for 68 or better.

[Shilgy]

BNGL I also agree it's not 15 shots but it also appears that no one in your group is "scratch" - a 0 handicap. It's just not that tough to get to 0. On a course like yours 10 scores of the last 20 at 73 as a low and 77 as a high with 8 other rounds in between gets a guy to scratch. The other 10 scores can be anything - 80, 84, 79, whatever. You are a plus handicap for sure, whether you keep one or not. A scratch golfer is a zero handicap, it's as much of a math equation as it is scoring ability. Your group is far better than scratch, but agree it's not a 15 shot spread unless you put a scratch golfer on the 1st tee of say, the PGA Championship where he is going to post 83 and plenty of guys go for 68 or better.

No kidding, based on those score player 4, Mr BNGL, is about +5 to +6. That's using best half of score for cap.

[Obee]

Farmer, I understand your point, but you don’t think those green books or having played the course multiple times before help pros sink a couple of putts that might otherwise miss? There’s a reason they all pay to have them during the round.

 

The books are great, but they are not the magic bullet some people seem to think they are. I played my state amateur with a green book this year. During my practice round and the three tournament rounds, I'd say you could directly attribute a grand total of two extra putts made due to the book. Those were the only two instances where I changed my read based on what the book said and made the putt. In all other cases, the book simply helped confirm what I already thought. Even for someone who uses AimPoint Express like myself, having slope percentages in the book doesn't give you the read because you're almost never putting down a consistent line. You're always putting across/up/down slopes of different value. It's easier to get the number by just doing the Express read directly.

 

Why does every pro have one? Because when you're playing for as much money as they are, you'd be a fool to pass on having the best information possible. If you took them away, scoring averages would change only marginally, if at all.

 

More than anything, I think the green books help on pitching, chipping, and also helping to NOT 3-putt. I agree that they don't help you make a bunch more putts.

 

Obee - wouldn't getting help with putt/stroke avoidance (avoiding a 3-putt) essentially have the same value as getting help making a putt? The net effect of each would be to reduce the score on a hole by 1.

 

Serious question...not stoking the fire.

 

Completely agree. But's it's a little more "hidden" than it would be if you were all of a sudden making significantly more 15 to 20 footers than normal. :-)