Can a 4-handicap man beat an LPGA pro?

[nsxguy]

IIRC the dream team in basketball lost to a bunch of collegians in workouts as well. Chuck Daly the coach was thrilled.

 

Lol ok fine. A very good High school boys aau team would beat the uconn women by 30...try and argue that one!

Start a thread about that then. This is completely different.

 

:dntknw:

 

Isn't it funny how someone who spent all sorts of time "proving",,,,,,, with numbers, handicaps, opinion, etc on how a 4 couldn't beat AN LPGA Pro, nevermind that nobody said he'd beat her all/most/half the time, just that he *could* beat her,,,,,,,,,,,,,, picks an outlier like the dream team being beaten by college guys, thereby "proving" that which he argued so vehemently against ? :cheesy:

[deadsolid...shank]

I've mentioned this before, but since we played yesterday, It seems timely.

 

I played yesterday against an LPGA player; she's home in between a top 25 finish in Bermuda, and leaving for Australia next week. We had 6 single digit men, ranging from a 2 to an 8, including one of the assistants at the club; all play tournament golf. The 6 guys split into three two-man teams, and she plays the better ball of each of the three teams in stroke play, with each of us putting up $20.

 

Long story short, she won all three bets; two of them easily, and the final one by a shot, so she walked away with grocery money for the week until she leaves for down under. I played in the group with her, and her 69 could have been a 65 if she had made anything on the greens; she was playing a hybrid set of tees that were about 6500. My partner and I played 6300, one of the other teams played 6000, and the final team played the same tees she did. And this was our home course; had we been playing her on a course we didn't know, she would have really killed us!

 

We've done this quite a bit over the last year whenever she's in town, and I think she's lost once. And she's doing this while she works on her game, and without her husband caddying; he's a former teaching pro who now caddies for her full time.

 

FWIW...

 

Honestly to me, that sounds more like the men's teams didn't play very well. A three man best ball team consisting of all single digits on their own course should be able cover a 69.

Two man teams. There were three two-man teams. I used to have the same bet with some buddies. I was scratch at the time and the two buddies were about six. I would play their best ball straight up. And I did fine. Great for the concentration as I felt any bogey would be a lost hole.

 

Oops! My mistake. Reading comprehension skills need some serious work.

[swing thoughts]

I am currently around a 4, and I originally thought I would get crushed. I am constantly in awe of how well the lpga players perform: accuracy, short game, etc. I ususally shoot mid-70s from the back tees at my home course. I occasionally shoot par, and twice have shot 1-under. I would be longer than most of the women except maybe lexi and a couple others. But regardless of well they do in the short game, there is something to be said for me hitting a 7-iron from 170 on the same hole that she is hitting a 4 hybrid from 190. However, they are so much better in the short game, assuming we both played well but not necessarily great, I would still get beat by probably 3 to 7 strokes. Wes Short, JR. plays on my course, and he usually shoots mid-60s. I'm guessing he is a few shots better than the ladies, so they would probably shoot around 68-72 (3 to 7 better than my average). Over the course of a four-day event, that's 20 strokes. So depending on your definition of "crushed", they may or may not crush me. They will, however, beat me 19 out of 20. But if I could just shave three or four strokes off my game... haha easier said than done!

[carrera]

st, what is your home course's rating/slope?

[swing thoughts]

st, what is your home course's rating/slope?

 

It's 72.8/129. Length is key on this course if you play black tees. There are some wide fairways, and there are several holes with deadly fairway bunkers, two with forced carries and one where if you can carry 260, you're almost guaranteed a 3 or 4, whereas if you can't you have to go around the water and it's almost a guaranteed 5 (actually probably not for LPGA player, but you get my drift). Also there's a 220 par 3 and a two that are 175-185 that almost always play into a 15-30 mph Texas wind. If I can make those forced carries, clear the fairway bunkers, and hit long irons on the par 3's versus their hybrids or fairway woods, then that's a huge advantage for me. So my point is, even though they are much better all-around players than I am, there are courses out there that if I happen to be hitting 'em straight that day, I can overpower them and have a chance to win.

[bluedot]

I love the logic with which male golfers come to the conclusion that MORE golf course somehow makes them MORE able to compete evenly with a better player. This is the kind of stuff that drives our wives nuts.:) It's called male ego...

 

Here's a news flash: If Player A is better than Player B from 6500 yds and you move them back another 500 yds, guess what? The gap between them doesn't get smaller, it gets bigger! The LPGA doesn't play 6500 yd courses because the women can't play that distance effectively; they play that distance so that the women are hitting clubs into greens similar to what the men's tour hits, and so that the women are making risk-reward decisions on par 5's and the like.

 

Try this thought experiment: Just forget gender for a moment, and assume two players; one a TRUE scratch golfer, and the other a 4 handicap. The simple fact is that the scratch player is better IN EVERY PHASE OF THE GAME than the 4, even if the 4 hits the ball farther off the tee. The MORE golf they play, the more the overall superiority of the scratch player asserts itself, period.

 

If I play Lebron James one-on-one sudden death, and I get the ball first, I have a chance. (I have a devastating hook shot from behind the 3 point line!) If we play to more than one, I have less chance; MUCH less. If we play to 10, I have NO chance.

 

And so it is with the scratch vs. the 4; make them play more golf, and the things that make the scratch better assert themselves more, not less.

 

But, hey, keep believing that if you move far enough back that you can beat an LPGA pro. Vegas depends on that kind of thinking.

[farmer]

I love the logic with which male golfers come to the conclusion that MORE golf course somehow makes them MORE able to compete evenly with a better player. This is the kind of stuff that drives our wives nuts. :) It's called male ego...

 

Here's a news flash: If Player A is better than Player B from 6500 yds and you move them back another 500 yds, guess what? The gap between them doesn't get smaller, it gets bigger! The LPGA doesn't play 6500 yd courses because the women can't play that distance effectively; they play that distance so that the women are hitting clubs into greens similar to what the men's tour hits, and so that the women are making risk-reward decisions on par 5's and the like.

 

Try this thought experiment: Just forget gender for a moment, and assume two players; one a TRUE scratch golfer, and the other a 4 handicap. The simple fact is that the scratch player is better IN EVERY PHASE OF THE GAME than the 4, even if the 4 hits the ball farther off the tee. The MORE golf they play, the more the overall superiority of the scratch player asserts itself, period.

 

If I play Lebron James one-on-one sudden death, and I get the ball first, I have a chance. (I have a devastating hook shot from behind the 3 point line!) If we play to more than one, I have less chance; MUCH less. If we play to 10, I have NO chance.

 

And so it is with the scratch vs. the 4; make them play more golf, and the things that make the scratch better assert themselves more, not less.

 

But, hey, keep believing that if you move far enough back that you can beat an LPGA pro. Vegas depends on that kind of thinking.

You're really going to throw logic and fact into a perfectly nice fantasy thread? Keep in mind that someone always wins the Powerball.

[Bad9]

I love the logic with which male golfers come to the conclusion that MORE golf course somehow makes them MORE able to compete evenly with a better player. This is the kind of stuff that drives our wives nuts. :) It's called male ego...

 

Here's a news flash: If Player A is better than Player B from 6500 yds and you move them back another 500 yds, guess what? The gap between them doesn't get smaller, it gets bigger! The LPGA doesn't play 6500 yd courses because the women can't play that distance effectively; they play that distance so that the women are hitting clubs into greens similar to what the men's tour hits, and so that the women are making risk-reward decisions on par 5's and the like.

 

Try this thought experiment: Just forget gender for a moment, and assume two players; one a TRUE scratch golfer, and the other a 4 handicap. The simple fact is that the scratch player is better IN EVERY PHASE OF THE GAME than the 4, even if the 4 hits the ball farther off the tee. The MORE golf they play, the more the overall superiority of the scratch player asserts itself, period.

 

If I play Lebron James one-on-one sudden death, and I get the ball first, I have a chance. (I have a devastating hook shot from behind the 3 point line!) If we play to more than one, I have less chance; MUCH less. If we play to 10, I have NO chance.

 

And so it is with the scratch vs. the 4; make them play more golf, and the things that make the scratch better assert themselves more, not less.

 

But, hey, keep believing that if you move far enough back that you can beat an LPGA pro. Vegas depends on that kind of thinking.

 

Agree 100%. Not at the same level but a couple of years ago I played with a former member of the Illinois State women's varsity team from 2007-2010. We played from the same set of tees and hit it pretty much the same distance. At the end of the round she beat me by about 8-10 shots and I played well, just about at my cap. Didn't ake penalties, etc. The difference was she knew how to score. Missing a meant a ho hum tap in par for her while I was fighting for them. Big difference. She didn't do anything spectacular and ended up one or two over par.

[Guia]

When is this post going to die? It is obvious that 4 HC male cannot beat an LPGA player.

[TheGeekGolfer]

 

 

When is this post going to die? It is obvious that 4 HC male CAN beat an LPGA player.

 

There, I fixed it for you.

 

Take a 4 HC male that averages 270 carry and put him on his home course, playing from the back tees. I've played with plenty of these guys. Put him up against the 150th ranked LPGA pro, who probably hits it about 240 carry. Have her play the same back tees.

 

I'll put my money on the 4 HC male.

[Obee]

 

When is this post going to die? It is obvious that 4 HC male CAN beat an LPGA player.

 

There, I fixed it for you.

 

Take a 4 HC male that averages 270 carry and put him on his home course, playing from the back tees. I've played with plenty of these guys. Put him up against the 150th ranked LPGA pro, who probably hits it about 240 carry. Have her play the same back tees.

 

I'll put my money on the 4 HC male.

 

Sigh....

[PowderedToastMan]

 

 

When is this post going to die? It is obvious that 4 HC male CAN beat an LPGA player.

 

There, I fixed it for you.

 

Take a 4 HC male that averages 270 carry and put him on his home course, playing from the back tees. I've played with plenty of these guys. Put him up against the 150th ranked LPGA pro, who probably hits it about 240 carry. Have her play the same back tees.

 

I'll put my money on the 4 HC male.

You, my friend, must really love giving away money.

[dhc1]

 

 

When is this post going to die? It is obvious that 4 HC male CAN beat an LPGA player.

 

There, I fixed it for you.

 

Take a 4 HC male that averages 270 carry and put him on his home course, playing from the back tees. I've played with plenty of these guys. Put him up against the 150th ranked LPGA pro, who probably hits it about 240 carry. Have her play the same back tees.

 

I'll put my money on the 4 HC male.

 

I feel like Anthony Kim betting against charles Barkley....

 

"You're saying you think you could outrun me?" Barkley says.

 

"Let me see how much money I have in the car," says Kim. "I have no doubt I can outrun you."

 

http://www.golf.com/tour-and-news/charles-barkley-mission-fix-what-can-only-be-called-swing-hell

 

If you were serious and were able to find a group of people willing to back you for real money (or front the money yourself), I would back the truck up and really try to make this happen.

 

Would be awesome.

[Guia]

Just for the record he changed my "Cannot" to "Can".

 

He also wants the LPGA pro to move to the tips and play on 1 leg while singing the star spangled banner.

[Buzzkill]

Hopefully after 7 years of discussion, a 4 handicapper has sense enough to know they can't come close to the LPGA level of play. Of course, we can always dream and there isn't nothing wrong with that!

[NoTalentLefty]

If they a 4 hcp could what does it matter? They're girls! Just kidding...

[TheGeekGolfer]

Just for the record he changed my "Cannot" to "Can".

 

He also wants the LPGA pro to move to the tips and play on 1 leg while singing the star spangled banner.

If you ask if player A can beat player B in a match in any sport, then they must play under the same parameters. That's a given in my book. I said nothing about hitting on '1 leg' or anything else so ludicrous.

 

If an amateur basketball player thought they could beat a pro, would you say it's ok if they play on different height rims? I doubt it.

[Guia]

The point is that you are "Trying" to load the competition in favor of the 4 HC. For them to be on an even foot, she would have to play from the mid tee, and he from the tips. It would not make any difference though the 4 HC is no where near the talent of an LPGA player.

[TheGeekGolfer]

The point is that you are "Trying" to load the competition in favor of the 4 HC. For them to be on an even foot, she would have to play from the mid tee, and he from the tips. It would not make any difference though the 4 HC is no where near the talent of an LPGA player.

how is playing from different tees 'on an even foot(ing)'?

[Guia]

So that the strength factor will be the same. Men are stronger than women, in most cases.

[mjen43]

So that the strength factor will be the same. Men are stronger than women, in most cases.

 

The top men have better short games than the top women. Must mean men are naturally better at the short game. How will the short game factor be made equal?

[TheGeekGolfer]

So that the strength factor will be the same. Men are stronger than women, in most cases.

So what. The question is 'can a 4 hc beat an LPGA pro'? That implies they play straight up, not 'handicapped' by the tees they play. Otherwise, to 'put them on equal footing', you might as well give the 4 hc strokes. Which negates the original question in the first place.

 

 

[Guia]

I have tired of this subject.

[TheGeekGolfer]

I have tired of this subject.

Good

[deadsolid...shank]

I have tired of this subject.

 

Guia, I think you're wrong on this one.

 

The entire premise of the thread is if the amateur man can compete with the professional women. It's an even, straight up contest. It has to be to really answer the question. If they play different tee boxes and she waxes him, what is the first statement that is going to be made, "well sure she won, she played a shorter course".

 

A better analogy than the basketball one is the Billy Jean King- Bobby Riggs match. She didn't get to use the entire width of the court including the doubles allys. The "playing field" has to be equal, or neutral if you willl, for this to answered.

[dhc1]

So that the strength factor will be the same. Men are stronger than women, in most cases.

So what. The question is 'can a 4 hc beat an LPGA pro'? That implies they play straight up, not 'handicapped' by the tees they play. Otherwise, to 'put them on equal footing', you might as well give the 4 hc strokes. Which negates the original question in the first place.

 

Happy to make the bet, straight up from the back tees.....

[Obee]

So that the strength factor will be the same. Men are stronger than women, in most cases.

So what. The question is 'can a 4 hc beat an LPGA pro'? That implies they play straight up, not 'handicapped' by the tees they play. Otherwise, to 'put them on equal footing', you might as well give the 4 hc strokes. Which negates the original question in the first place.

 

Happy to make the bet, straight up from the back tees.....

 

Same here. I'll take the LPGAer every day and twice on Sundays. Unless the "4" is a big sandbagger (there are plenty of them) or the course chosen has multiple 230+ forced carries.

[flog2]

wow, this thread is STILL going................*shakesHeadSmiley*

[HeadCase1]

Betting straight up on the 4 is asinine.. I would need the following conditions to be met for me to ever consider laying coin on the 4 cap: He would have to be a naturally talented 4 with legitimate speed. He would have to be the kind of 4 who will be scratch in the not-too-distant future (motivated, confident, knowledgeable). They would have to play from 7150+; or perhaps at that course in the Bahamas where they played the Pure Silk (because I have no doubt that with their A game there are certain 4 caps who could do better than the 1st round 78 Gulbis posted on a course where he could reach all 5 par 5's in 2 and probably drive a couple of the 4's). And then I'm going to need 50:1 odds or better to make it worth the wager lol

[CEPick]

Let's rename it to "Could a male 4-handicapper beat Michelle Wie RIGHT NOW"?