US Kids Priority Status

[mrshinsa]

 

> @AUSweeper said:

> I’ve wondered what the effects on local tours will be. Better players just play their 4 tourneys, get a couple low scores and be done with it?

 

That's exactly our plan. We have status already and I cringe at the idea of paying $60 for some of the dumps our local director books.

[JuniorGolfParent]

> @AUSweeper said:

> I’ve wondered what the effects on local tours will be. Better players just play their 4 tourneys, get a couple low scores and be done with it?

 

In many cases the top finishers in Local Tours weren't playing more than 4 or 5 events anyway to (historically) gain Burgundy status.

 

If they are consistently coming in first, then unless the second best player plays every Local Tour event AND consistently comes in 2nd (or 1st when best player doesn't compete) you can get by with 4, or max 5, tournaments.

 

[AUSweeper]

> @mrshinsa said:

> That's exactly our plan. We have status already and I cringe at the idea of paying $60 for some of the dumps our local director books.

 

That’s what I’m expecting. It’s good for getting more competitive fields at worlds or whatever, but I’m not so sure it’s good for US Kids’ business with kids playing the minimum.

[leezer99]

> @AUSweeper said:

> > @mrshinsa said:

> > That's exactly our plan. We have status already and I cringe at the idea of paying $60 for some of the dumps our local director books.

>

> That’s what I’m expecting. It’s good for getting more competitive fields at worlds or whatever, but I’m not so sure it’s good for US Kids’ business with kids playing the minimum.

 

This is going to be horrible for the local tours. Everyone used to play as many as they could to get points to win their age division and you only ever had one winner each season... now they are going to play their four events and be done with it until the next year when they have to get status again. The only kids left playing local tours consistently are going to be the not so great players.

[tobaccoroad]

> @mrshinsa said:

> I'm sorry he missed out by few strokes. If he's shooting 74/73, it's only a matter of time before he can shoot low, and he still has at least a couple of seasons to do so. If a kid's best score is a 76 and gets a Level 10, he will be invited to all the regionals and state. However, if he gets invited to the Worlds, he will most likely be shooting in the 80's, due to the longer yardage and tougher course, which is the bottom half of the group.

> No-one knows whether the cutoff will be at Level 11, 10 or even 9 yet so all this could be a non-issue.

>

>

Thank you - I appreciate it but I hope my post is not interpreted as my being upset and sad or frustrated or asking for sympathy. My son had an opportunity to make it a moot point and will learn how to finish under pressure. He has been under par late in tournament rounds many times and can't seem to finish under par for 18 holes but that is all part of the process. He will learn how to finish and gain from this.

 

My post was more intended to show an example of how **(even though I completely support that a kid that is shooting elite scores in local competition should earn the highest non World Champion status)** there is a big gap between earning level 11 and (for example my son) shooting 72-74 and winning the local tour and being the next level down.

 

My off the cuff, brainstorming suggestions:

Level 12 - World Champions

Level 11 - Top 20 in the previous year World's, Top 2 in Regionals, Winner of States, 72 or better twice in the same season (minimum 4 tournament played), 74 or better twice in the same season AND Champion of that local tour.

Level 10 - Place 21-40 in the previous year World's, 3-5 in Regionals, 2-3 in States, 74 or better twice in the same season (minimum 4 tournaments played) 76 or better twice in the same season AND Champion of the that local tour

Levels 9-1 remain the same.

 

[wildcatden]

> @leezer99 said:

> > @AUSweeper said:

> > > @mrshinsa said:

> > > That's exactly our plan. We have status already and I cringe at the idea of paying $60 for some of the dumps our local director books.

> >

> > That’s what I’m expecting. It’s good for getting more competitive fields at worlds or whatever, but I’m not so sure it’s good for US Kids’ business with kids playing the minimum.

>

> This is going to be horrible for the local tours. Everyone used to play as many as they could to get points to win their age division and you only ever had one winner each season... now they are going to play their four events and be done with it until the next year when they have to get status again. The only kids left playing local tours consistently are going to be the not so great players.

 

 

 

Maybe, but in the prior system, why would juniors play year round? Suppose you won your Fall Tour (after the Worlds) and gained the proper status you needed. Why did these kids continue to play winter, spring and summer tour if they already had status?

[tobaccoroad]

> @darter79 said:

 

> Agree 100% there is no real reward here for winning and placing well at the bigger events in terms of status. I would like to see a bit more status on winning the local tour as well. But at the end of the day score matters more now. Go shoot lower scores and you can walk away with an good status where before some age groups you could shoot 48 on 9 and have guaranteed status. I do believe this system is better than the old.

 

I agree with this as well. The new system will eliminate players (parents) that chase weaker tours and win with their kids shooting in the mid 40s or 80s. Deserving players will get their status with the new way.

BTW, some tours play easy courses, others play tougher ones. For example, 73 at Pinehurst Course 8 is like shooting 69/70 at a lot of others. By the new system, US Kids treats that 73 just like a 76. In general the difference between 73 and 72 is not even close to the difference between a 73 and a 76.

That is inherently my issue with it.

[tobaccoroad]

> @kcap said:

> There is a notch benefit for shooting low and winning the tour. If your son had shot 76 twice and not won the tour his status would have been 9 but now he is 10.

>

> I am going to assume that US Kids had bunch of data and where kids score in each age group for locals when deciding the cut-offs - and thus they chose 72 and 76 (win the tour).

>

> I do believe they do not give enough credit to winning/placing in the Worlds/Regional. Placing 4th or 5th in the worlds or 2nd in a regional is a 10 which is the same as winning your local tour and shooting 76 and below. That is just wrong. I think we can all agree coming 4-5th at Worlds implies shooting well below par in the shorter local tours.

>

 

 

Good points for sure.

I posted some ideas that I think addresses these. Again, I am sure that US Kids will continue to tweak this until it is fair to as many as possible. There will always be a situation that someone is unhappy about but I do commend them for addressing issues and working on them.

I would like to know the data they used to come up with 76 as the number for winning the tour and getting level 10. That is pretty far away from even par. In my sons example, he was 2 over par for those tournaments. By the criteria US Kids is using, 8 over par would have given the same status. Maybe it is just me but that seems like a big difference.

[Golfingdawg19]

> @tobaccoroad said:

> > @mrshinsa said:

> > I'm sorry he missed out by few strokes. If he's shooting 74/73, it's only a matter of time before he can shoot low, and he still has at least a couple of seasons to do so. If a kid's best score is a 76 and gets a Level 10, he will be invited to all the regionals and state. However, if he gets invited to the Worlds, he will most likely be shooting in the 80's, due to the longer yardage and tougher course, which is the bottom half of the group.

> > No-one knows whether the cutoff will be at Level 11, 10 or even 9 yet so all this could be a non-issue.

> >

> >

> Thank you - I appreciate it but I hope my post is not interpreted as my being upset and sad or frustrated or asking for sympathy. My son had an opportunity to make it a moot point and will learn how to finish under pressure. He has been under par late in tournament rounds many times and can't seem to finish under par for 18 holes but that is all part of the process. He will learn how to finish and gain from this.

>

> My post was more intended to show an example of how **(even though I completely support that a kid that is shooting elite scores in local competition should earn the highest non World Champion status)** there is a big gap between earning level 11 and (for example my son) shooting 72-74 and winning the local tour and being the next level down.

>

> My off the cuff, brainstorming suggestions:

> Level 12 - World Champions

> Level 11 - Top 20 in the previous year World's, Top 2 in Regionals, Winner of States, 72 or better twice in the same season (minimum 4 tournament played), 74 or better twice in the same season AND Champion of that local tour.

> Level 10 - Place 21-40 in the previous year World's, 3-5 in Regionals, 2-3 in States, 74 or better twice in the same season (minimum 4 tournaments played) 76 or better twice in the same season AND Champion of the that local tour

> Levels 9-1 remain the same.

>

My daughter finished in the top 10 last summer for a state and regional event. We got to worlds and she finished 31st out of 115 girls which I thought was very good for her first time at worlds. I think she got a level 6 status for that and she played better there than at the state and regional event. She played a longer golf course, against way better competition and didn’t get rewarded IMO. This is why I say there needs to be some weight but on the distance the tournament is played at and the level of competition.

 

[hangontight]

Someone made mention that criteria for worlds would be out soon. It was my understanding that they would still fill the field in waves , starting with the highest level , then down , until the field was full. Is that incorrect?

 

 

 

[tobaccoroad]

> @hangontight said:

> Someone made mention that criteria for worlds would be out soon. It was my understanding that they would still fill the field in waves , starting with the highest level , then down , until the field was full. Is that incorrect?

>

>

>

Correct. Starting with 12 and then 11 etc.

 

[JuniorGolfParent]

> @wildcatden said:

> > @leezer99 said:

> > > @AUSweeper said:

> > > > @mrshinsa said:

> > > > That's exactly our plan. We have status already and I cringe at the idea of paying $60 for some of the dumps our local director books.

> > >

> > > That’s what I’m expecting. It’s good for getting more competitive fields at worlds or whatever, but I’m not so sure it’s good for US Kids’ business with kids playing the minimum.

> >

> > This is going to be horrible for the local tours. Everyone used to play as many as they could to get points to win their age division and you only ever had one winner each season... now they are going to play their four events and be done with it until the next year when they have to get status again. The only kids left playing local tours consistently are going to be the not so great players.

>

>

>

> Maybe, but in the prior system, why would juniors play year round? Suppose you won your Fall Tour (after the Worlds) and gained the proper status you needed. Why did these kids continue to play winter, spring and summer tour if they already had status?

 

I agree with this - the player that today would play a minimum number of tournaments just to get status via scoring would be the same player who doesn’t play multiple tours/seasons, so there isn’t going to be much difference.

 

US Kids Local Tours are the best option for most under 12yo’s, and almost everyone under 9yo’s.

 

[BloctonGolf11]

> @wildcatden said:

> > @leezer99 said:

> > > @AUSweeper said:

> > > > @mrshinsa said:

> > > > That's exactly our plan. We have status already and I cringe at the idea of paying $60 for some of the dumps our local director books.

> > >

> > > That’s what I’m expecting. It’s good for getting more competitive fields at worlds or whatever, but I’m not so sure it’s good for US Kids’ business with kids playing the minimum.

> >

> > This is going to be horrible for the local tours. Everyone used to play as many as they could to get points to win their age division and you only ever had one winner each season... now they are going to play their four events and be done with it until the next year when they have to get status again. The only kids left playing local tours consistently are going to be the not so great players.

>

>

>

> Maybe, but in the prior system, why would juniors play year round? Suppose you won your Fall Tour (after the Worlds) and gained the proper status you needed. Why did these kids continue to play winter, spring and summer tour if they already had status?

 

Because some parents are obsessed with their kids winning as many USKids local tournaments and tours even it means absolutely nothing for them status or other wise. You can also say it is the competitive opportunity, there is not a lot out there for young kids to play in, and to see friends etc. but I firmly believe the primary reason is to rack up wins.

[tobaccoroad]

This has really been a great thread with some good points.

Reading back over all of the posts (especially mine) I realize that I may not be giving US Kids enough credit for what they are doing. Tournament golf is not just for kids that can score low and compete at the highest level. It is extremely important to have a platform for all skill levels and golf will (hopefully) always be a sport where someone that shoots 90 can play with someone that shoots 70. The new status gives KIDS a chance to see success. For a 9 year old boy to shoot 90 but still see that it earned them something can build confidence and bring the kid back to the course. It is easy for me to look at the situation that my son might be in (or the situations that you all have posted) but the important and easily forgotten side is what this means to all of the kids and not just the smaller percentage that are shooting good scores.

 

This compares at the highest level. Rory, Brooks, Tiger etc usually play a limited schedule compared to the journeyman that has to truly play to support themselves. The lesser players play 28-30 tournaments a year while the stars play around 20. We have made some great friends that are great players but also friends that aren't. If US Kids were to go the route of catering to the elites and become an elite tour, it would be tragic for junior golf.

 

Bottom line, I appreciate the levels and my son will play to the new system and hopefully earn Level 11. If not, so be it and he will continue to work hard and compete as he moves towards other tours and opportunities.

[hangontight]

> @BloctonGolf11 said:

> > @wildcatden said:

> > > @leezer99 said:

> > > > @AUSweeper said:

> > > > > @mrshinsa said:

> > > > > That's exactly our plan. We have status already and I cringe at the idea of paying $60 for some of the dumps our local director books.

> > > >

> > > > That’s what I’m expecting. It’s good for getting more competitive fields at worlds or whatever, but I’m not so sure it’s good for US Kids’ business with kids playing the minimum.

> > >

> > > This is going to be horrible for the local tours. Everyone used to play as many as they could to get points to win their age division and you only ever had one winner each season... now they are going to play their four events and be done with it until the next year when they have to get status again. The only kids left playing local tours consistently are going to be the not so great players.

> >

> >

> >

> > Maybe, but in the prior system, why would juniors play year round? Suppose you won your Fall Tour (after the Worlds) and gained the proper status you needed. Why did these kids continue to play winter, spring and summer tour if they already had status?

>

> Because some parents are obsessed with their kids winning as many USKids local tournaments and tours even it means absolutely nothing for them status or other wise. You can also say it is the competitive opportunity, there is not a lot out there for young kids to play in, and to see friends etc. but I firmly believe the primary reason is to rack up wins.

 

"Means absolutely nothing...." is thrown around too much on here. I personally am over the local tours for my kid for a handful of reasons. HOWEVER, for a lot of kids/families , they are MEANINGFUL....time spent together doing something enjoyable, valuable life lessons learned, time with friends , good competition (depending on area), healthy outdoor activity (beats the heck out of playing video games), on and on.... These are all great reasons to do local tours, pretty much the same reason us adults play with our buddies, play in our club championships, and enter best ball events. None of us are going pro, but that doesnt make us doing these things "Meaningless". We all want our kids to learn, grown, and get better...but not everyone's objective in junior golf is to create top level elite athletes.

[BloctonGolf11]

> @hangontight said:

> > @BloctonGolf11 said:

> > > @wildcatden said:

> > > > @leezer99 said:

> > > > > @AUSweeper said:

> > > > > > @mrshinsa said:

> > > > > > That's exactly our plan. We have status already and I cringe at the idea of paying $60 for some of the dumps our local director books.

> > > > >

> > > > > That’s what I’m expecting. It’s good for getting more competitive fields at worlds or whatever, but I’m not so sure it’s good for US Kids’ business with kids playing the minimum.

> > > >

> > > > This is going to be horrible for the local tours. Everyone used to play as many as they could to get points to win their age division and you only ever had one winner each season... now they are going to play their four events and be done with it until the next year when they have to get status again. The only kids left playing local tours consistently are going to be the not so great players.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Maybe, but in the prior system, why would juniors play year round? Suppose you won your Fall Tour (after the Worlds) and gained the proper status you needed. Why did these kids continue to play winter, spring and summer tour if they already had status?

> >

> > Because some parents are obsessed with their kids winning as many USKids local tournaments and tours even it means absolutely nothing for them status or other wise. You can also say it is the competitive opportunity, there is not a lot out there for young kids to play in, and to see friends etc. but I firmly believe the primary reason is to rack up wins.

>

> "Means absolutely nothing...." is thrown around too much on here. I personally am over the local tours for my kid for a handful of reasons. HOWEVER, for a lot of kids/families , they are MEANINGFUL....time spent together doing something enjoyable, valuable life lessons learned, time with friends , good competition (depending on area), healthy outdoor activity (beats the heck out of playing video games), on and on.... These are all great reasons to do local tours, pretty much the same reason us adults play with our buddies, play in our club championships, and enter best ball events. None of us are going pro, but that doesnt make us doing these things "Meaningless". We all want our kids to learn, grown, and get better...but not everyone's objective in junior golf is to create top level elite athletes.

 

I completely see your point, but I see very little point in going out and winning repeatedly at the same level for the price you pay for USKids locals. If you are dominating a local tour why not move up to something more challenging in the area until you need to grab status again? It seems after sweeping a local tour it would be logical to do something else. That is just me though I guess. In our area we see the same kids enter tour after tour and I just don't see the benefit if you are winning the majority and already have status. Heck last year we had a kid win two simultaneous tours because he was playing two different tours in two different states! I will say, I think this new system actually does give an actual reason to play more until you hit level 11 which is going to be a tough goal, no matter your age.

[darter79]

> @hangontight said:

> Someone made mention that criteria for worlds would be out soon. It was my understanding that they would still fill the field in waves , starting with the highest level , then down , until the field was full. Is that incorrect?

>

>

>

 

if trends are normal as you know they will do lifetime and 11 and then whatever they feel at that point. I think they will do it like regionals and do Lifetime, 11, 10, 9 at once in most age groups.

[hangontight]

> @BloctonGolf11 said:

> > @hangontight said:

> > > @BloctonGolf11 said:

> > > > @wildcatden said:

> > > > > @leezer99 said:

> > > > > > @AUSweeper said:

> > > > > > > @mrshinsa said:

> > > > > > > That's exactly our plan. We have status already and I cringe at the idea of paying $60 for some of the dumps our local director books.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > That’s what I’m expecting. It’s good for getting more competitive fields at worlds or whatever, but I’m not so sure it’s good for US Kids’ business with kids playing the minimum.

> > > > >

> > > > > This is going to be horrible for the local tours. Everyone used to play as many as they could to get points to win their age division and you only ever had one winner each season... now they are going to play their four events and be done with it until the next year when they have to get status again. The only kids left playing local tours consistently are going to be the not so great players.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Maybe, but in the prior system, why would juniors play year round? Suppose you won your Fall Tour (after the Worlds) and gained the proper status you needed. Why did these kids continue to play winter, spring and summer tour if they already had status?

> > >

> > > Because some parents are obsessed with their kids winning as many USKids local tournaments and tours even it means absolutely nothing for them status or other wise. You can also say it is the competitive opportunity, there is not a lot out there for young kids to play in, and to see friends etc. but I firmly believe the primary reason is to rack up wins.

> >

> > "Means absolutely nothing...." is thrown around too much on here. I personally am over the local tours for my kid for a handful of reasons. HOWEVER, for a lot of kids/families , they are MEANINGFUL....time spent together doing something enjoyable, valuable life lessons learned, time with friends , good competition (depending on area), healthy outdoor activity (beats the heck out of playing video games), on and on.... These are all great reasons to do local tours, pretty much the same reason us adults play with our buddies, play in our club championships, and enter best ball events. None of us are going pro, but that doesnt make us doing these things "Meaningless". We all want our kids to learn, grown, and get better...but not everyone's objective in junior golf is to create top level elite athletes.

>

> I completely see your point, but I see very little point in going out and winning repeatedly at the same level for the price you pay for USKids locals. If you are dominating a local tour why not move up to something more challenging in the area until you need to grab status again? It seems after sweeping a local tour it would be logical to do something else. That is just me though I guess. In our area we see the same kids enter tour after tour and I just don't see the benefit if you are winning the majority and already have status. Heck last year we had a kid win two simultaneous tours because he was playing two different tours in two different states! I will say, I think this new system actually does give an actual reason to play more until you hit level 11 which is going to be a tough goal, no matter your age.

 

A lot depends on where you are and what opportunities you have. For example....our local tours rarely attract fields bigger than 3 kids, and for the most part non-competitive... BUT there literally are no other local & frequent options. Believe me , I search high and low. As we all know, its not that much fun to be in a 2 man field with the same kid week after week...especially if you are winning/losing by a large margin. My son is no superstar, but he is at a point (we think) that quality over quantity is better for him. But if we did have a local tour with 10 of his competitive buddies week in/week out, I would bet he would play more and I would let him...because that would be fun. I mostly am all for moving on from the local tours once your skill and status level outgrow its usefulness, but I dont blame the kids/parents who do participate in the local tours with larger & competitive fields. ...quite simply, it is a lot of fun. Now, I do think that the stud who is out there collecting his 85th blue ribbon medal over a smaller & weaker field needs to move on.

[darter79]

I lot on here don't seem to enjoy locals I for one love our local events for a few reasons. I think our director is great, picks great courses, sprinkles in new ones once in a while as well so you find some value in what you are paying for. In our age group its actually quite competitive two kids in the top 25 one top 5 at worlds, the fields are not large but the margin of victory can be 1, we been in a few playoffs as well. Again i know some areas kids can win by 20 and there no fun in that on both ends. People says locals don't matter, it doesn't but it does. One reason we play almost all the locals is its a lot of fun for my daughter and I and we have great friends plus always good to see how she improves in a tournament setting vs a casual round. I was even told by my daughters coach to keep playing locals to build confidence from a scoring perceptive.

[heavy_hitter]

I am glad I don't have to think about this stuff anymore.

[yellowlover519]

I live in an area that is 1.5 hours or less to any given tournament on 3-5 local tours (depending on season). My take is USKG is a great learning ground where you are able to actually teach golf IQ on the course in a competitive situation. Local tournaments help a child hone their game under the supervision of an adult caddie (some of whom that are more helpful than others). It's the perfect transition to local PGA section events and then, hopefully, AJGA events. IMO, USKG has far more value, in our area, than a Hurricane event with 3-5 kids in a 12U bracket.

As far as playing many local USKG events irrespective of status -- it really is the best competition for 12U golf as far as the fields go. My son has yet to enter a local pga event that is more competitive than the local USKG event. This will obviously change at 12-13, but for our area, local USKG events are far more competitive than a pga section event.

[leezer99]

> @yellowlover519 said:

> I live in an area that is 1.5 hours or less to any given tournament on 3-5 local tours (depending on season). My take is USKG is a great learning ground where you are able to actually teach golf IQ on the course in a competitive situation. Local tournaments help a child hone their game under the supervision of an adult caddie (some of whom that are more helpful than others). It's the perfect transition to local PGA section events and then, hopefully, AJGA events. IMO, USKG has far more value, in our area, than a Hurricane event with 3-5 kids in a 12U bracket.

> As far as playing many local USKG events irrespective of status -- it really is the best competition for 12U golf as far as the fields go. My son has yet to enter a local pga event that is more competitive than the local USKG event. This will obviously change at 12-13, but for our area, local USKG events are far more competitive than a pga section event.

 

The only reason to worry at this point about competition is if you are results focused. If you want to get better at process have him play the PGA events on his own at longer yardages.

[yellowlover519]

> @leezer99 said:

> > @yellowlover519 said:

> > I live in an area that is 1.5 hours or less to any given tournament on 3-5 local tours (depending on season). My take is USKG is a great learning ground where you are able to actually teach golf IQ on the course in a competitive situation. Local tournaments help a child hone their game under the supervision of an adult caddie (some of whom that are more helpful than others). It's the perfect transition to local PGA section events and then, hopefully, AJGA events. IMO, USKG has far more value, in our area, than a Hurricane event with 3-5 kids in a 12U bracket.

> > As far as playing many local USKG events irrespective of status -- it really is the best competition for 12U golf as far as the fields go. My son has yet to enter a local pga event that is more competitive than the local USKG event. This will obviously change at 12-13, but for our area, local USKG events are far more competitive than a pga section event.

>

> The only reason to worry at this point about competition is if you are results focused. If you want to get better at process have him play the PGA events on his own at longer yardages.

 

What does wanting to play in a competitive field have anything to do with result-focus that is different than playing on a local pga section event against the field? Is your son just playing for fun at a local section event? Doesn't care at all how he finishes relative to the field? Playing in a competitive field should light a fire to understand where you stack up against your peers. In theory, it should bring out the pressures of tournament golf. If you are talking about the benefits of playing without a caddy, I get that argument, and I strongly agree. If you are talking about the benefits of playing from longer yardages, I get that as well (although at a certain point, it becomes a lesser tournament because your playing bogey golf with a few pars sprinkled in). But are you saying that it is better to play in local pga section events at 12u than USKG? I think that is an interesting argument and would like to hear more...

 

I don't know about your sections, but our section events for juniors will play 6200+ for 18 hole players. There are a handful of 11-12 year olds where they can hit enough GIR from those yardages. IMO, not better to play a 9-hole PGA event where par is just an arbitrary number as opposed to 18 on USKG.

[leezer99]

> @yellowlover519 said:

 

> What does wanting to play in a competitive field have anything to do with result-focus that is different than playing on a local pga section event against the field? Is your son just playing for fun at a local section event? Doesn't care at all how he finishes relative to the field? Playing in a competitive field should light a fire to understand where you stack up against your peers. In theory, it should bring out the pressures of tournament golf.

 

You are comparing yourself to others which is a results oriented goal. If your kid places fifth but shoots his best round ever, would you consider it a failure because he didn't win? My son plays in one of the most competitive PGA leagues in the country in the 12-14 year old division as an 11 year old. He doesn't win but that's not our goal and yes, he is fine with it.

 

> If you are talking about the benefits of playing without a caddy, I get that argument, and I strongly agree. If you are talking about the benefits of playing from longer yardages, I get that as well (although at a certain point, it becomes a lesser tournament because your playing bogey golf with a few pars sprinkled in).

 

The benefits of playing without a caddie are huge. Kids learn through failure and caddies are there to limit failure. With my son at least, he can reach every hole within regulation. If he misses the green for whatever reason he has to bear down and rely on his short game (which isn't great but he has a plan to work on it).

 

> But are you saying that it is better to play in local pga section events at 12u than USKG? I think that is an interesting argument and would like to hear more...

 

Your local PGA section is in the business of giving back and growing the game. US Kids is in the business of making a profit and stroking egos of parents by giving medals to the top five kids in every event, posting pictures on IG and rewarding you for better play by allowing you to spend a bunch of money on regionals and worlds. We were very lucky in our area with our US Kids tournament director but even he went and made his own tour that now just a year in is providing a better environment for kids 9 - 18.

[yellowlover519]

Leezer - solid responses. To me, in our section, the ideal age to focus more on the local PGA events is 12. I don't know of any 11-year olds that can hit every GIR in our local section playing 6200+ (usually 6400 to 6600 seems to be the norm) . Sure, I know of some, but they are not in my section. IMO, if you have the ability to consistently drive 230 at 11 and 250 at 12, you have to be amongst the longest hitters for your age group. So the other option for an 11-year old or a less polished 12-year old are the 9-hole PGA section tourneys. IMO, playing 18-hole USKG events is better in so many ways compared to a 9-hole tourney.

 

Maybe there is an argument that not being able to hit GIR is helpful in honing a short game and learning how to score. I actually agree with this somewhat. I strongly agree that playing without a caddy is paramount to one's development.

 

You can't minimize USKG events bc you are comparing yourself to others. That is kid-specific. You can enter a USKG event and not care about outcome as well. I'm just saying that USKG seems to provide the best competition for 12U golfers. Some may choose not to seek that competition or care for it, which is fine. But I cannot agree that local PGA events (at least in my area) are better than USKG events for 12U golfers. Same thing goes for Hurricane events or IJGT events.

[leezer99]

@yellowlover519 Sounds like you are stuck between a rock and a hard place. IMO the US Kids shorter yardages do more harm than good.

 

Here are the yardages my son will be playing in his two events this weekend. Scores are going to be 'interesting' but that's because he just changed his backswing and grip yesterday. As long as he goes through his process I will be very happy. I do expect him to sleep well both nights though.

 

[kcap]

My son plays both the Jr PGA where for 11-15 the distance is 6200-6400 yard as well as USKG. I do not think you can compare them both. They are both essential for your child. He played a lot of Jr PGA in the summer (the tournaments are on the week day and mom just dropped him at the course). I will say, while he enjoys Jr PGA more than USKG because it is more like 3 kids walking and playing golf. No caddies and no spectators. He did start find hitting Driver and (3W or Hybird) boring..So this fall we are doing mostly US KIDS and he is loving driver/wedge/short iron

Who wants to play in order to safe par when you can be trying for birdies.

 

Next year - he will probably play more Jr PGA then USKIDS; only because he has gained distance off the tee now 400 par 4s are quite reachable for him.

 

 

[yellowlover519]

We are in the same boat. A lot more PGA section events in the summer. My son just moved to 11-year old division and he is not a short hitter (he could reach all of leezer’s first round in regulation with the exception of the 9th par 4 at 435 - I guess it depends how it plays bc he hit a USKG par 5 in two playing 420). But irrespective of that, I am just struggling with the notion that playing USKG yardages does more harm than good or that PGA section events at 12u is better than USKG events. Isn’t the ideal scenario for boys junior golf to bomb driver and be sharp with your short iron and wedge game? Not sure if my son is going very far if he’s got hybrid, long iron or 5 wood into greens all the time. Does the opinion change if I say 11U?

 

I get the no caddying but I see very few good 11-year olds and 12-year olds at USKG that are caddy-dependent.

[leezer99]

> @yellowlover519 said:

> We are in the same boat. A lot more PGA section events in the summer. My son just moved to 11-year old division and he is not a short hitter (he could reach all of leezer’s first round in regulation with the exception of the 9th par 4 at 435 - I guess it depends how it plays bc he hit a USKG par 5 in two playing 420). But irrespective of that, I am just struggling with the notion that playing USKG yardages does more harm than good or that PGA section events at 12u is better than USKG events. Isn’t the ideal scenario for boys junior golf to bomb driver and be sharp with your short iron and wedge game? Not sure if my son is going very far if he’s got hybrid, long iron or 5 wood into greens all the time. Does the opinion change if I say 11U?

>

> I get the no caddying but I see very few good 11-year olds and 12-year olds at USKG that are caddy-dependent.

 

We all have our own secrets to success.

[tiger1873]

> @yellowlover519 said:

> We are in the same boat. A lot more PGA section events in the summer. My son just moved to 11-year old division and he is not a short hitter (he could reach all of leezer’s first round in regulation with the exception of the 9th par 4 at 435 - I guess it depends how it plays bc he hit a USKG par 5 in two playing 420). But irrespective of that, I am just struggling with the notion that playing USKG yardages does more harm than good or that PGA section events at 12u is better than USKG events. Isn’t the ideal scenario for boys junior golf to bomb driver and be sharp with your short iron and wedge game? Not sure if my son is going very far if he’s got hybrid, long iron or 5 wood into greens all the time. Does the opinion change if I say 11U?

>

> I get the no caddying but I see very few good 11-year olds and 12-year olds at USKG that are caddy-dependent.

 

Depends on who you believe giving advice out there.

 

Lots of people who have very good track records recommend that you learn how to hit long irons into the green. They will flat out tell you the short game is the easiest part to learn. It makes a lot sense if you step back and think about it.