Is scratch possible for everybody?

[RBImGuy]

[quote name='pkwilli1999' timestamp='1405567907' post='9717523']
People like Dan of the dan plan think that with enough deliberate practice you can get to that level.

Do you think it is attainable for everybody or is it a destiny combined with practice?

PK
[/quote]

Yes, no doubt.
current golf swing teachings however makes it hard to get there.

[4Par]

[quote name='pinhigh27' timestamp='1405820952' post='9738313']Scratch isn't that good... People act like it's the holy grail. If you start playing at 55, yeah it's probably gonna be pretty difficult. Start when you're 20? Shouldn't be a problem. If you're scratch, that's equivalent in performance to the average high school player for competitive teams. I'm pretty sure anyone can reach that level of play assuming they don't run out of time or have physical limitations.

Yeah it's going to take some time, but when has getting good at anything not taken time? Possible is much different than likely to achieve... 95 percent of people don't put in the time needed...[/quote]

Average high school players where? Lol

It's way more than time needed.

[pkwilli1999]

[quote name='4Par' timestamp='1405858347' post='9740031'][quote name='pinhigh27' timestamp='1405820952' post='9738313']Scratch isn't that good... People act like it's the holy grail. If you start playing at 55, yeah it's probably gonna be pretty difficult. Start when you're 20? Shouldn't be a problem. If you're scratch, that's equivalent in performance to the average high school player for competitive teams. I'm pretty sure anyone can reach that level of play assuming they don't run out of time or have physical limitations.

Yeah it's going to take some time, but when has getting good at anything not taken time? Possible is much different than likely to achieve... 95 percent of people don't put in the time needed...[/quote]

Average high school players where? Lol

It's way more than time needed.[/quote]Having been around high school players I know for a fact that scratch will make you a number one at most schools by at least a couple of strokes

[KILLEDBYASHANKEDWEDGE]

The minimum it takes to obtain a scratch rating:

[color=#333333][size=3]According to the USGA, a scratch golfer is defined as "a player who can play to a Course Handicap of zero on any and all rated golf courses. A male scratch golfer, for rating purposes, can hit tee shots an average of 250 yards and can reach a 470-yard hole in two shots at sea level. A female scratch golfer, for rating purposes, can hit tee shots an average of 210 yards and can reach a 400-yard hole in two shots at sea level."[/size][/color]

[4Par]

I'm not blaming you KBS but why would the USGA publish such a statement? Length isn't tied to handicap in that way.

[hbear]

Well it is to certain extent.
Yes we all heard of a guy, but realistically swing speed (distance) is a HUGE predictor of golf ability.

This is well known and documented.

I don't know many true zeros that can't hit over 230 with driver.

Especially if playing from the "blue" or actual back tees.

[hoganfan924]

[quote name='KILLEDBYASHANKEDWEDGE' timestamp='1405859160' post='9740091']
The minimum it takes to obtain a scratch rating:

[color=#333333][size=3]According to the USGA, a scratch golfer is defined as "a player who can play to a Course Handicap of zero on any and all rated golf courses. A male scratch golfer,[size=5][b] for rating purposes[/b][/size], can hit tee shots an average of 250 yards and can reach a 470-yard hole in two shots at sea level. A female scratch golfer, for rating purposes, can hit tee shots an average of 210 yards and can reach a 400-yard hole in two shots at sea level."[/size][/color]
[/quote]

You've misunderstood the purpose of that statement. This is what the USGA defines for the people that go out to rate courses. They have a standard for "scratch" and "bogey" golfers in order to give a course a proper slope rating, since these golfers will be used to rate the course from the back tees.

So if you're a 0 index but you never play from tees longer than say, 6200 yards and can't hit a driver past 240, you're not going to be able to give a proper rating to a 7200 yard course (in relation to a bogey golfer) and you don't qualify to do so per USGA guidelines for rating courses.

The ability to average 250 yards off the tee has nothing to do with obtaining a scratch index, although obviously it gives you a better chance of getting there.

[KILLEDBYASHANKEDWEDGE]

[quote name='hoganfan924' timestamp='1405867985' post='9740851']
You've misunderstood the purpose of that statement. This is what the USGA defines for the people that go out to rate courses. They have a standard for "scratch" and "bogey" golfers in order to give a course a proper slope rating, since these golfers will be used to rate the course from the back tees. The ability to average 250 yards off the tee has nothing to do with obtaining a scratch index, although obviously it gives you a better chance of getting there.
[/quote]

Regardless, it fits undeniably. Maybe a rare exception here and there, as with every rule of thumb.

[Jamboy72]

[quote name='hoganfan924' timestamp='1405867985' post='9740851']
[quote name='KILLEDBYASHANKEDWEDGE' timestamp='1405859160' post='9740091']
The minimum it takes to obtain a scratch rating:

[color=#333333][size=3]According to the USGA, a scratch golfer is defined as "a player who can play to a Course Handicap of zero on any and all rated golf courses. A male scratch golfer,[size=5][b] for rating purposes[/b][/size], can hit tee shots an average of 250 yards and can reach a 470-yard hole in two shots at sea level. A female scratch golfer, for rating purposes, can hit tee shots an average of 210 yards and can reach a 400-yard hole in two shots at sea level."[/size][/color]
[/quote]

You've misunderstood the purpose of that statement. This is what the USGA defines for the people that go out to rate courses. They have a standard for "scratch" and "bogey" golfers in order to give a course a proper slope rating, since these golfers will be used to rate the course from the back tees.

So if you're a 0 index but you never play from tees longer than say, 6200 yards and can't hit a driver past 240, you're not going to be able to give a proper rating to a 7200 yard course (in relation to a bogey golfer) and you don't qualify to do so per USGA guidelines for rating courses.

[b]The ability to average 250 yards off the tee has nothing to do with obtaining a scratch index, although obviously it gives you a better chance of getting there.[/b]
[/quote]

This seems contradictory to me. If length has nothing to do with reaching scratch, then how can it also give you a better chance? It's either related and part of the conversation, or it's not. Obviously, the USGA feels that distance plays some role in obtaining scratch and while it isn't the only factor, it most certainly is one.

[hoganfan924]

[quote name='Jamboy72' timestamp='1405869847' post='9741063']
[quote name='hoganfan924' timestamp='1405867985' post='9740851']
[quote name='KILLEDBYASHANKEDWEDGE' timestamp='1405859160' post='9740091']
The minimum it takes to obtain a scratch rating:

[color=#333333][size=3]According to the USGA, a scratch golfer is defined as "a player who can play to a Course Handicap of zero on any and all rated golf courses. A male scratch golfer,[size=5][b] for rating purposes[/b][/size], can hit tee shots an average of 250 yards and can reach a 470-yard hole in two shots at sea level. A female scratch golfer, for rating purposes, can hit tee shots an average of 210 yards and can reach a 400-yard hole in two shots at sea level."[/size][/color]
[/quote]

You've misunderstood the purpose of that statement. This is what the USGA defines for the people that go out to rate courses. They have a standard for "scratch" and "bogey" golfers in order to give a course a proper slope rating, since these golfers will be used to rate the course from the back tees.

So if you're a 0 index but you never play from tees longer than say, 6200 yards and can't hit a driver past 240, you're not going to be able to give a proper rating to a 7200 yard course (in relation to a bogey golfer) and you don't qualify to do so per USGA guidelines for rating courses.

[b]The ability to average 250 yards off the tee has nothing to do with obtaining a scratch index, although obviously it gives you a better chance of getting there.[/b]
[/quote]

This seems contradictory to me. If length has nothing to do with reaching scratch, then how can it also give you a better chance? It's either related and part of the conversation, or it's not. Obviously, the USGA feels that distance plays some role in obtaining scratch and while it isn't the only factor, it most certainly is one.
[/quote]

IOW, it's not a REQUIREMENT from the USGA to achieve a scratch index. Plenty of seniors that are + indexes that can't hit it past 240, let alone average a minimum of 250.

Again, you guys are misinterpreting what the USGA is saying in their statement. They only want 0 index course raters that average at least 250 in order to give courses a proper slope rating, especially from the back tees. It's not a statement about what is required to achieve a 0 index.

[KILLEDBYASHANKEDWEDGE]

[quote name='hoganfan924' timestamp='1405870441' post='9741133']
[quote name='Jamboy72' timestamp='1405869847' post='9741063']
[quote name='hoganfan924' timestamp='1405867985' post='9740851']
[quote name='KILLEDBYASHANKEDWEDGE' timestamp='1405859160' post='9740091']
The minimum it takes to obtain a scratch rating:

[color=#333333][size=3]According to the USGA, a scratch golfer is defined as "a player who can play to a Course Handicap of zero on any and all rated golf courses. A male scratch golfer,[size=5][b] for rating purposes[/b][/size], can hit tee shots an average of 250 yards and can reach a 470-yard hole in two shots at sea level. A female scratch golfer, for rating purposes, can hit tee shots an average of 210 yards and can reach a 400-yard hole in two shots at sea level."[/size][/color]
[/quote]

You've misunderstood the purpose of that statement. This is what the USGA defines for the people that go out to rate courses. They have a standard for "scratch" and "bogey" golfers in order to give a course a proper slope rating, since these golfers will be used to rate the course from the back tees.

So if you're a 0 index but you never play from tees longer than say, 6200 yards and can't hit a driver past 240, you're not going to be able to give a proper rating to a 7200 yard course (in relation to a bogey golfer) and you don't qualify to do so per USGA guidelines for rating courses.

[b]The ability to average 250 yards off the tee has nothing to do with obtaining a scratch index, although obviously it gives you a better chance of getting there.[/b]
[/quote]

This seems contradictory to me. If length has nothing to do with reaching scratch, then how can it also give you a better chance? It's either related and part of the conversation, or it's not. Obviously, the USGA feels that distance plays some role in obtaining scratch and while it isn't the only factor, it most certainly is one.
[/quote]

IOW, it's not a REQUIREMENT from the USGA to achieve a scratch index. Plenty of seniors that are + indexes that can't hit it past 240, let alone average a minimum of 250.

Again, you guys are misinterpreting what the USGA is saying in their statement. They only want 0 index course raters that average at least 250 in order to give courses a proper slope rating, especially from the back tees. It's not a statement about what is required to achieve a 0 index.
[/quote]

If you have driver/3w into the majority of par 4's, young or old, you are nowhere near scratch, impossible. Maybe from the shorter tee boxes on any given course, but when I discuss scratch I am talking about scratch from the tips.

Now, can we agree that the ability to reach greens in regulation is one determining factor in a scratch index?

[pkwilli1999]

Well if you can't putt it doesn't matter how many greens you hit

PK

[isaacbm]

So for the guys that believe that "anyone " can reach scratch, then what is the limit? Can anyone be as good as Tiger was in 2000? Why was he so much better then than now? If you say Butch I'm going to throw my computer at the wall. And how about Phil? Why wasn't he ever as good as Tiger? Was it because he didn't have enough good coaching? Equipment? Hours put in? He practiced at least as hard as tiger...And what about a guy like Woody Austin? Why wasn't he as good as say Zac Johnson. He's talked about putting over 40000 hours into the game and he's always been a fringe tour player. Why? And why aren't both of them as good as phil?

At what point does natural ability play a role?

To say that "anyone" can learn touch is ridiculous to me. I played with a 3 and a 5 yesterday that play 5 times a week and are both interested in playing tournament golf. They are two of the worst lag putters I've ever seen. I've been trying to help them for years and they just don't get better. They both average 3-4 three putts per round. I average one every 3-4 rounds. Why? They're technique is good, they've spent hours per week for 20 years playing the game and practicing lag putting specifically. Why don't they get better?

I always bring up the darts example. Easiest "swing" motion in the world. One hinge of the elbow and wrist and a release. A person should be able to learn to throw a dart in about 10 minutes. There's no equipment issues, no coaching issues, no physical requirements, and hell, you can play drunk. Why are some people sooooooooo much better then others?

Golf is an incredibly physical game that requires many physical abilities to do well. Touch is hard to define but it is imperitive to reach a high level. Hand eye is important but not in the way that a lot of people think. It's not like baseball where you have to hit a moving ball. Its more like when chipping over a ridge in a green. You have to see the distance, understand how the lie and the slope/firmness/speed of the green will affect a shot, and then you have to translate that to your arms and hands to exert a perfect amount of energy into the ball while bottoming out at the right spot to ensure proper contact. Are you telling me that requires no "physical" ability?


Again, what is that limit then? Can everyone get to a plus 2? Plus 5? Plus 10? Can we all be as good as Kim Jong Il? Do you guys believe that there is no limit? Or do you simply believe that scratch is not that great?

The average golfer is still an 18 index and has been for 40 years. To me, the average golfers potential is about 5 lower then their actual handicap. Improving by 5 is enormous. If you've played golf for years a couple of times per week and you're an 18, I don't care how hard you work at it or if you're coached by Butch himself, you're not getting to be a single much less a scratch.

Every single plus handicap I know was a scratch within 2-3 years of taking up the game. Not one single guy played for years and then decided to put extra effort/coaching/fitting/better equipment/ and suddenly became a scratch. NOT ONE.

[DeNinny]

[quote name='isaacbm' timestamp='1405872697' post='9741361']
So for the guys that believe that "anyone " can reach scratch, then what is the limit? Can anyone be as good as Tiger was in 2000? Why was he so much better then than now? If you say Butch I'm going to throw my computer at the wall. And how about Phil? Why wasn't he ever as good as Tiger? Was it because he didn't have enough good coaching? Equipment? Hours put in? He practiced at least as hard as tiger...And what about a guy like Woody Austin? Why wasn't he as good as say Zac Johnson. He's talked about putting over 40000 hours into the game and he's always been a fringe tour player. Why? And why aren't both of them as good as phil?

At what point does natural ability play a role?

To say that "anyone" can learn touch is ridiculous to me. I played with a 3 and a 5 yesterday that play 5 times a week and are both interested in playing tournament golf. They are two of the worst lag putters I've ever seen. I've been trying to help them for years and they just don't get better. They both average 3-4 three putts per round. I average one every 3-4 rounds. Why? They're technique is good, they've spent hours per week for 20 years playing the game and practicing lag putting specifically. Why don't they get better?

I always bring up the darts example. Easiest "swing" motion in the world. One hinge of the elbow and wrist and a release. A person should be able to learn to throw a dart in about 10 minutes. There's no equipment issues, no coaching issues, no physical requirements, and hell, you can play drunk. Why are some people sooooooooo much better then others?

Golf is an incredibly physical game that requires many physical abilities to do well. Touch is hard to define but it is imperitive to reach a high level. Hand eye is important but not in the way that a lot of people think. It's not like baseball where you have to hit a moving ball. Its more like when chipping over a ridge in a green. You have to see the distance, understand how the lie and the slope/firmness/speed of the green will affect a shot, and then you have to translate that to your arms and hands to exert a perfect amount of energy into the ball while bottoming out at the right spot to ensure proper contact. Are you telling me that requires no "physical" ability?


Again, what is that limit then? Can everyone get to a plus 2? Plus 5? Plus 10? Can we all be as good as Kim Jong Il? Do you guys believe that there is no limit? Or do you simply believe that scratch is not that great?

The average golfer is still an 18 index and has been for 40 years. To me, the average golfers potential is about 5 lower then their actual handicap. Improving by 5 is enormous. If you've played golf for years a couple of times per week and you're an 18, I don't care how hard you work at it or if you're coached by Butch himself, you're not getting to be a single much less a scratch.

Every single plus handicap I know was a scratch within 2-3 years of taking up the game. Not one single guy played for years and then decided to put extra effort/coaching/fitting/better equipment/ and suddenly became a scratch. NOT ONE.
[/quote]

[pkwilli1999]

[quote name='isaacbm' timestamp='1405872697' post='9741361']So for the guys that believe that "anyone " can reach scratch, then what is the limit? Can anyone be as good as Tiger was in 2000? Why was he so much better then than now? If you say Butch I'm going to throw my computer at the wall. And how about Phil? Why wasn't he ever as good as Tiger? Was it because he didn't have enough good coaching? Equipment? Hours put in? He practiced at least as hard as tiger...And what about a guy like Woody Austin? Why wasn't he as good as say Zac Johnson. He's talked about putting over 40000 hours into the game and he's always been a fringe tour player. Why? And why aren't both of them as good as phil?

At what point does natural ability play a role?

To say that "anyone" can learn touch is ridiculous to me. I played with a 3 and a 5 yesterday that play 5 times a week and are both interested in playing tournament golf. They are two of the worst lag putters I've ever seen. I've been trying to help them for years and they just don't get better. They both average 3-4 three putts per round. I average one every 3-4 rounds. Why? They're technique is good, they've spent hours per week for 20 years playing the game and practicing lag putting specifically. Why don't they get better?

I always bring up the darts example. Easiest "swing" motion in the world. One hinge of the elbow and wrist and a release. A person should be able to learn to throw a dart in about 10 minutes. There's no equipment issues, no coaching issues, no physical requirements, and hell, you can play drunk. Why are some people sooooooooo much better then others?

Golf is an incredibly physical game that requires many physical abilities to do well. Touch is hard to define but it is imperitive to reach a high level. Hand eye is important but not in the way that a lot of people think. It's not like baseball where you have to hit a moving ball. Its more like when chipping over a ridge in a green. You have to see the distance, understand how the lie and the slope/firmness/speed of the green will affect a shot, and then you have to translate that to your arms and hands to exert a perfect amount of energy into the ball while bottoming out at the right spot to ensure proper contact. Are you telling me that requires no "physical" ability?


Again, what is that limit then? Can everyone get to a plus 2? Plus 5? Plus 10? Can we all be as good as Kim Jong Il? Do you guys believe that there is no limit? Or do you simply believe that scratch is not that great?

The average golfer is still an 18 index and has been for 40 years. To me, the average golfers potential is about 5 lower then their actual handicap. Improving by 5 is enormous. If you've played golf for years a couple of times per week and you're an 18, I don't care how hard you work at it or if you're coached by Butch himself, you're not getting to be a single much less a scratch.

Every single plus handicap I know was a scratch within 2-3 years of taking up the game. Not one single guy played for years and then decided to put extra effort/coaching/fitting/better equipment/ and suddenly became a scratch. NOT ONE.[/quote]hereHowever what do you mean with the 2-3 years until scratch thing. I am going to be a freshman next year and am a 13.6. I started 3.5 years ago are you saying I'll never be scratch?

PK

[KILLEDBYASHANKEDWEDGE]

[quote name='pkwilli1999' timestamp='1405873091' post='9741411']
However what do you mean with the 2-3 years until scratch thing. I am going to be a freshman next year and am a 13.6. I started 3.5 years ago are you saying I'll never be scratch?

PK
[/quote]

You haven't stopped growing yet.

[drewtaylor21]

[quote name='isaacbm' timestamp='1405872697' post='9741361']
So for the guys that believe that "anyone " can reach scratch, then what is the limit? Can anyone be as good as Tiger was in 2000? Why was he so much better then than now? If you say Butch I'm going to throw my computer at the wall. And how about Phil? Why wasn't he ever as good as Tiger? Was it because he didn't have enough good coaching? Equipment? Hours put in? He practiced at least as hard as tiger...And what about a guy like Woody Austin? Why wasn't he as good as say Zac Johnson. He's talked about putting over 40000 hours into the game and he's always been a fringe tour player. Why? And why aren't both of them as good as phil?

At what point does natural ability play a role?

To say that "anyone" can learn touch is ridiculous to me. I played with a 3 and a 5 yesterday that play 5 times a week and are both interested in playing tournament golf. They are two of the worst lag putters I've ever seen. I've been trying to help them for years and they just don't get better. They both average 3-4 three putts per round. I average one every 3-4 rounds. Why? They're technique is good, they've spent hours per week for 20 years playing the game and practicing lag putting specifically. Why don't they get better?

I always bring up the darts example. Easiest "swing" motion in the world. One hinge of the elbow and wrist and a release. A person should be able to learn to throw a dart in about 10 minutes. There's no equipment issues, no coaching issues, no physical requirements, and hell, you can play drunk. Why are some people sooooooooo much better then others?

Golf is an incredibly physical game that requires many physical abilities to do well. Touch is hard to define but it is imperitive to reach a high level. Hand eye is important but not in the way that a lot of people think. It's not like baseball where you have to hit a moving ball. Its more like when chipping over a ridge in a green. You have to see the distance, understand how the lie and the slope/firmness/speed of the green will affect a shot, and then you have to translate that to your arms and hands to exert a perfect amount of energy into the ball while bottoming out at the right spot to ensure proper contact. Are you telling me that requires no "physical" ability?


Again, what is that limit then? Can everyone get to a plus 2? Plus 5? Plus 10? Can we all be as good as Kim Jong Il? Do you guys believe that there is no limit? Or do you simply believe that scratch is not that great?

The average golfer is still an 18 index and has been for 40 years. To me, the average golfers potential is about 5 lower then their actual handicap. Improving by 5 is enormous. If you've played golf for years a couple of times per week and you're an 18, I don't care how hard you work at it or if you're coached by Butch himself, you're not getting to be a single much less a scratch.

Every single plus handicap I know was a scratch within 2-3 years of taking up the game. Not one single guy played for years and then decided to put extra effort/coaching/fitting/better equipment/ and suddenly became a scratch. NOT ONE.
[/quote]

I started at 13 years old, was probably a 15-18 hcp within a year, 8-10 in 2 years, 3-5 in 3 years. Played casually after HS for a couple years, then got to a very weak 1 or 2 cap by age 20. Played a year of DIII and actually got worse. For the next 8 years I played when I could, but only casually again, probably to about a 3 or so. Spring of 2013 I decided I wanted to play competitively again, put in a ton of work and got to +1 by August 2013. Put in even more work this year and I'm at +2. I strongly believe I have the ability to get to +4. At this point, I am extremely happy with my ballstriking/swing, but need to improve some areas of my short game and putting from 6-10 feet.

I made improvements over a very extended period of time. A lot of this had to do with learning things on my own rather than with the help of a teacher. A lot had to do with physical growth as well. But if you look at an actual timeline, it took me 17 years to get to scratch, then another 2 to get to a +2 that travels and competes.

I do agree with you that everyone has a ceiling that no additional work will overcome. However, I also believe that everyone who actually wants to become a scratch golfer could do it. Not just a "oh that'd be kinda cool to be scratch" but an approach where they believe they HAVE to achieve scratch or they won't be satisfied.

[pkwilli1999]

[quote name='drewtaylor21' timestamp='1405875572' post='9741667'][quote name='isaacbm' timestamp='1405872697' post='9741361']
So for the guys that believe that "anyone " can reach scratch, then what is the limit? Can anyone be as good as Tiger was in 2000? Why was he so much better then than now? If you say Butch I'm going to throw my computer at the wall. And how about Phil? Why wasn't he ever as good as Tiger? Was it because he didn't have enough good coaching? Equipment? Hours put in? He practiced at least as hard as tiger...And what about a guy like Woody Austin? Why wasn't he as good as say Zac Johnson. He's talked about putting over 40000 hours into the game and he's always been a fringe tour player. Why? And why aren't both of them as good as phil?

At what point does natural ability play a role?

To say that "anyone" can learn touch is ridiculous to me. I played with a 3 and a 5 yesterday that play 5 times a week and are both interested in playing tournament golf. They are two of the worst lag putters I've ever seen. I've been trying to help them for years and they just don't get better. They both average 3-4 three putts per round. I average one every 3-4 rounds. Why? They're technique is good, they've spent hours per week for 20 years playing the game and practicing lag putting specifically. Why don't they get better?

I always bring up the darts example. Easiest "swing" motion in the world. One hinge of the elbow and wrist and a release. A person should be able to learn to throw a dart in about 10 minutes. There's no equipment issues, no coaching issues, no physical requirements, and hell, you can play drunk. Why are some people sooooooooo much better then others?

Golf is an incredibly physical game that requires many physical abilities to do well. Touch is hard to define but it is imperitive to reach a high level. Hand eye is important but not in the way that a lot of people think. It's not like baseball where you have to hit a moving ball. Its more like when chipping over a ridge in a green. You have to see the distance, understand how the lie and the slope/firmness/speed of the green will affect a shot, and then you have to translate that to your arms and hands to exert a perfect amount of energy into the ball while bottoming out at the right spot to ensure proper contact. Are you telling me that requires no "physical" ability?


Again, what is that limit then? Can everyone get to a plus 2? Plus 5? Plus 10? Can we all be as good as Kim Jong Il? Do you guys believe that there is no limit? Or do you simply believe that scratch is not that great?

The average golfer is still an 18 index and has been for 40 years. To me, the average golfers potential is about 5 lower then their actual handicap. Improving by 5 is enormous. If you've played golf for years a couple of times per week and you're an 18, I don't care how hard you work at it or if you're coached by Butch himself, you're not getting to be a single much less a scratch.

Every single plus handicap I know was a scratch within 2-3 years of taking up the game. Not one single guy played for years and then decided to put extra effort/coaching/fitting/better equipment/ and suddenly became a scratch. NOT ONE.
[/quote]

I started at 13 years old, was probably a 15-18 hcp within a year, 8-10 in 2 years, 3-5 in 3 years. Played casually after HS for a couple years, then got to a very weak 1 or 2 cap by age 20. Played a year of DIII and actually got worse. For the next 8 years I played when I could, but only casually again, probably to about a 3 or so. Spring of 2013 I decided I wanted to play competitively again, put in a ton of work and got to +1 by August 2013. Put in even more work this year and I'm at +2. I strongly believe I have the ability to get to +4. At this point, I am extremely happy with my ballstriking/swing, but need to improve some areas of my short game and putting from 6-10 feet.

I made improvements over a very extended period of time. A lot of this had to do with learning things on my own rather than with the help of a teacher. A lot had to do with physical growth as well. But if you look at an actual timeline, it took me 17 years to get to scratch, then another 2 to get to a +2 that travels and competes.

I do agree with you that everyone has a ceiling that no additional work will overcome. However, I also believe that everyone who actually wants to become a scratch golfer could do it. Not just a "oh that'd be kinda cool to be scratch" but an approach where they believe they HAVE to achieve scratch or they won't be satisfied.[/quote]Is it bad that I'm not content with my level of golf? My goals (no matter how far fetched it may be) are to play D1 golf and play professional golf. My parents think I'm crazy that I'm willing to live in a car to play mini tour events but you have to be crazy to want to do that regardless.

[drewtaylor21]

[quote name='pkwilli1999' timestamp='1405876343' post='9741755']
Is it bad that I'm not content with my level of golf? My goals (no matter how far fetched it may be) are to play D1 golf and play professional golf. My parents think I'm crazy that I'm willing to live in a car to play mini tour events but you have to be crazy to want to do that regardless.
[/quote]

That's a GOOD thing! If your goals are to play professionally, you can never be content with the level of golf you've achieved.

Hang around players who are better than you. Watch how they play. Figure out what you need to do to get your game to that level, then go out and bust your a** until you get there!

[4Par]

The keyword in the title is EVERYBODY.... Despite several ambitious arguments I believe the answer is still no....

[Reasonability]

Hogan wrote (in so many words) he couldn't imagine why anyone who followed his approach, shouldn't be able to break 80. Yet so many who read the book never do. We can "yes-but" if this applicable since Hogan didn't say much (or even care to say much) about putting.

We can likewise -- believe. We are golfers and we commit. We also course manage and play "smart". So we are realistic people who also deeply commit. The rare few are naturally gifted it all phases of this difficult game and for them it comes comparatively easy. Some have to grind it out. EVERYONE will not break 80, and EVERYONE will not make it to scratch. But EVERYONE has the capacity to commit, and believe.

As Henry Ford put it -- If you think you can or think you can't -- you're right.

I only want to make the point that EVERYONE is a big word as 4Par stated. There are golfers who clearly can, be it born in their natural gifts, or their "will" to commit and grind it out, or both. The other part I "hope" isn't ever lost is... there is no harm and no shame in enjoying the game for the game's sake... low handicap, mid handicap, or high. Those who play on given their resource limitations be it time, commitment, cost, talent... whatever... should never be made to feel as though they any less a part of the golfing community. And those who do commit need not be held on a pedestal or viewed as outside of the norm just because they opted to set and achieve their goals.

[DeNinny]

[quote name='Reasonability' timestamp='1405879532' post='9742143']
Hogan wrote (in so many words) he couldn't imagine why anyone who followed his approach, shouldn't be able to break 80. Yet so many who read the book never do. We can "yes-but" if this applicable since Hogan didn't say much (or even care to say much) about putting.

We can likewise -- believe. We are golfers and we commit. We also course manage and play "smart". So we are realistic people who also deeply commit. The rare few are naturally gifted it all phases of this difficult game and for them it comes comparatively easy. Some have to grind it out. EVERYONE will not break 80, and EVERYONE will not make it to scratch. But EVERYONE has the capacity to commit, and believe.

As Henry Ford put it -- If you think you can or think you can't -- you're right.

I only want to make the point that EVERYONE is a big word as 4Par stated. There are golfers who clearly can, be it born in their natural gifts, or their "will" to commit and grind it out, or both. [b]The other part I "hope" isn't ever lost is... there is no harm and no shame in enjoying the game for the game's sake... low handicap, mid handicap, or high. Those who play on given their resource limitations be it time, commitment, cost, talent... whatever... should never be made to feel as though they any less a part of the golfing community.[/b] And those who do commit need not be held on a pedestal or viewed as outside of the norm just because they opted to set and achieve their goals.
[/quote]

To further, I think a lot in this category know deep down that they [i]don't [/i]have the talent, fortitude, and/or commitment to do it anyway, so they don't even go about setting their mind to it. They've already opted out. At least that's my excuse.

[pinhigh27]

[quote name='pkwilli1999' timestamp='1405858603' post='9740051']
[quote name='4Par' timestamp='1405858347' post='9740031'][quote name='pinhigh27' timestamp='1405820952' post='9738313']Scratch isn't that good... People act like it's the holy grail. If you start playing at 55, yeah it's probably gonna be pretty difficult. Start when you're 20? Shouldn't be a problem. If you're scratch, that's equivalent in performance to the average high school player for competitive teams. I'm pretty sure anyone can reach that level of play assuming they don't run out of time or have physical limitations.

Yeah it's going to take some time, but when has getting good at anything not taken time? Possible is much different than likely to achieve... 95 percent of people don't put in the time needed...[/quote]

Average high school players where? Lol

It's way more than time needed.[/quote]Having been around high school players I know for a fact that scratch will make you a number one at most schools by at least a couple of strokes
[/quote]

I said at competitive teams. I'm talking about in major metro or suburban areas for the highest division in the area. I know of teams where they have 10+ kids that are scratch, all on one team(I've literally see B team players shoot under par in tournaments on courses rated over par). There's a big difference in the quality of golf between suburbs of a major city(say Austin, TX) vs some random suburb of a smaller city in Kansas. The team I played on, we had 5 guys that were scratch or better and shot par or better in a tournament throughout the year. That's tournament golf too, which is completely different beast than playing with your buddies and shooting the rating.

[pkwilli1999]

[quote name='pinhigh27' timestamp='1405881992' post='9742391']
[quote name='pkwilli1999' timestamp='1405858603' post='9740051']
[quote name='4Par' timestamp='1405858347' post='9740031'][quote name='pinhigh27' timestamp='1405820952' post='9738313']Scratch isn't that good... People act like it's the holy grail. If you start playing at 55, yeah it's probably gonna be pretty difficult. Start when you're 20? Shouldn't be a problem. If you're scratch, that's equivalent in performance to the average high school player for competitive teams. I'm pretty sure anyone can reach that level of play assuming they don't run out of time or have physical limitations.

Yeah it's going to take some time, but when has getting good at anything not taken time? Possible is much different than likely to achieve... 95 percent of people don't put in the time needed...[/quote]

Average high school players where? Lol

It's way more than time needed.[/quote]Having been around high school players I know for a fact that scratch will make you a number one at most schools by at least a couple of strokes
[/quote]

I said at competitive teams. I'm talking about in major metro or suburban areas for the highest division in the area. I know of teams where they have 10+ kids that are scratch, all on one team(I've literally see B team players shoot under par in tournaments on courses rated over par). There's a big difference in the quality of golf between suburbs of a major city(say Austin, TX) vs some random suburb of a smaller city in Kansas. The team I played on, we had 5 guys that were scratch or better and shot par or better in a tournament throughout the year. That's tournament golf too, which is completely different beast than playing with your buddies and shooting the rating.
[/quote]I'm talking about a 6A School in one of the largest cities in the country, Houston. Our number one guy is going to UH, a top 25 D1 team, next year.

PK

[drewtaylor21]

[quote name='pkwilli1999' timestamp='1405905026' post='9745015']
[quote name='pinhigh27' timestamp='1405881992' post='9742391']
I said at competitive teams. I'm talking about in major metro or suburban areas for the highest division in the area. I know of teams where they have 10+ kids that are scratch, all on one team(I've literally see B team players shoot under par in tournaments on courses rated over par). There's a big difference in the quality of golf between suburbs of a major city(say Austin, TX) vs some random suburb of a smaller city in Kansas. The team I played on, we had 5 guys that were scratch or better and shot par or better in a tournament throughout the year. That's tournament golf too, which is completely different beast than playing with your buddies and shooting the rating.
[/quote]I'm talking about a 6A School in one of the largest cities in the country, Houston. Our number one guy is going to UH, a top 25 D1 team, next year.

PK
[/quote]

If he's not better than scratch he's not going to UH to play golf, that's for sure. He needs to be at least a +2-3 or he'll get his a** handed to him.

I have to agree with pinhigh27....in my experience scratch is usually about 3rd spot on a good HS team. On the very competitive teams, I'd be surprised if scratch was top 5.

[pinhigh27]

[quote name='pkwilli1999' timestamp='1405905026' post='9745015']
[quote name='pinhigh27' timestamp='1405881992' post='9742391']
[quote name='pkwilli1999' timestamp='1405858603' post='9740051']
[quote name='4Par' timestamp='1405858347' post='9740031'][quote name='pinhigh27' timestamp='1405820952' post='9738313']Scratch isn't that good... People act like it's the holy grail. If you start playing at 55, yeah it's probably gonna be pretty difficult. Start when you're 20? Shouldn't be a problem. If you're scratch, that's equivalent in performance to the average high school player for competitive teams. I'm pretty sure anyone can reach that level of play assuming they don't run out of time or have physical limitations.

Yeah it's going to take some time, but when has getting good at anything not taken time? Possible is much different than likely to achieve... 95 percent of people don't put in the time needed...[/quote]

Average high school players where? Lol

It's way more than time needed.[/quote]Having been around high school players I know for a fact that scratch will make you a number one at most schools by at least a couple of strokes
[/quote]

I said at competitive teams. I'm talking about in major metro or suburban areas for the highest division in the area. I know of teams where they have 10+ kids that are scratch, all on one team(I've literally see B team players shoot under par in tournaments on courses rated over par). There's a big difference in the quality of golf between suburbs of a major city(say Austin, TX) vs some random suburb of a smaller city in Kansas. The team I played on, we had 5 guys that were scratch or better and shot par or better in a tournament throughout the year. That's tournament golf too, which is completely different beast than playing with your buddies and shooting the rating.
[/quote]I'm talking about a 6A School in one of the largest cities in the country, Houston. Our number one guy is going to UH, a top 25 D1 team, next year.

PK
[/quote]

If he's going to a top 25 D1 team, he's way better than scratch... A scratch player only generally makes very low quality D1 schools. I have a friend that is going to a similar quality school(T25, always at nationals), and he just shot 20 under the rating over 4 days in a tournament..

[hoganfan924]

[quote name='KILLEDBYASHANKEDWEDGE' timestamp='1405871950' post='9741275']
[quote name='hoganfan924' timestamp='1405870441' post='9741133']
[quote name='Jamboy72' timestamp='1405869847' post='9741063']
[quote name='hoganfan924' timestamp='1405867985' post='9740851']
[quote name='KILLEDBYASHANKEDWEDGE' timestamp='1405859160' post='9740091']
The minimum it takes to obtain a scratch rating:

[color=#333333][size=3]According to the USGA, a scratch golfer is defined as "a player who can play to a Course Handicap of zero on any and all rated golf courses. A male scratch golfer,[size=5][b] for rating purposes[/b][/size], can hit tee shots an average of 250 yards and can reach a 470-yard hole in two shots at sea level. A female scratch golfer, for rating purposes, can hit tee shots an average of 210 yards and can reach a 400-yard hole in two shots at sea level."[/size][/color]
[/quote]

You've misunderstood the purpose of that statement. This is what the USGA defines for the people that go out to rate courses. They have a standard for "scratch" and "bogey" golfers in order to give a course a proper slope rating, since these golfers will be used to rate the course from the back tees.

So if you're a 0 index but you never play from tees longer than say, 6200 yards and can't hit a driver past 240, you're not going to be able to give a proper rating to a 7200 yard course (in relation to a bogey golfer) and you don't qualify to do so per USGA guidelines for rating courses.

[b]The ability to average 250 yards off the tee has nothing to do with obtaining a scratch index, although obviously it gives you a better chance of getting there.[/b]
[/quote]

This seems contradictory to me. If length has nothing to do with reaching scratch, then how can it also give you a better chance? It's either related and part of the conversation, or it's not. Obviously, the USGA feels that distance plays some role in obtaining scratch and while it isn't the only factor, it most certainly is one.
[/quote]

IOW, it's not a REQUIREMENT from the USGA to achieve a scratch index. Plenty of seniors that are + indexes that can't hit it past 240, let alone average a minimum of 250.

Again, you guys are misinterpreting what the USGA is saying in their statement. They only want 0 index course raters that average at least 250 in order to give courses a proper slope rating, especially from the back tees. It's not a statement about what is required to achieve a 0 index.
[/quote]

If you have driver/3w into the majority of par 4's, young or old, you are nowhere near scratch, impossible. Maybe from the shorter tee boxes on any given course, but when I discuss scratch I am talking about scratch from the tips.

Now, can we agree that the ability to reach greens in regulation is one determining factor in a scratch index?
[/quote]

Of course being long gives you an advantage in being able to achieve a 0 index, but plenty of + index players do not even average 250 off the tee. Who said Driver/3W into "the majority" of par 4's? The "majority of par 4's" are nowhere near the 470 yard number indicated by the USGA to be a "scratch" course rater. Most courses (if they have [b][i]any[/i][/b]) will only have one or two of these from the tips.

Ben Crenshaw is averaging less than 240 yards off the tee this year on the Champions tour. Think he's "anywhere near scratch?" Five other guys are averaging less than 255.

Looking back just 20 years, there were 15 guys on the PGA tour in 1994 averaging less than 250. They played plenty of 7000+ yard courses back then too. Heck, Augusta National played 7040 yards in 1980, when 32 PGA tour players averaged less than 250 off the tee and they were playing persimmon and wound balata's.

Anyone that is a 0 index playing middle tees is just as legit as a 0 index playing any other tees. That's what the course rating and slope adjust for via differential. Plenty of very hard courses that are less than 7000 from the tips. Just played one today, 6892 yard, par 71 with a 73.2 stroke rating, where [i][b]maybe[/b][/i] only one par 4 can't be reached in 2 with a 240 yard drive. Our state am qualifiers and state am are usually played between 6400-6900 and this year's course only had one 470+ yard par 4.

[4Par]

[quote name='drewtaylor21' timestamp='1405906659' post='9745263'][quote name='pkwilli1999' timestamp='1405905026' post='9745015']
[quote name='pinhigh27' timestamp='1405881992' post='9742391']
I said at competitive teams. I'm talking about in major metro or suburban areas for the highest division in the area. I know of teams where they have 10+ kids that are scratch, all on one team(I've literally see B team players shoot under par in tournaments on courses rated over par). There's a big difference in the quality of golf between suburbs of a major city(say Austin, TX) vs some random suburb of a smaller city in Kansas. The team I played on, we had 5 guys that were scratch or better and shot par or better in a tournament throughout the year. That's tournament golf too, which is completely different beast than playing with your buddies and shooting the rating.
[/quote]I'm talking about a 6A School in one of the largest cities in the country, Houston. Our number one guy is going to UH, a top 25 D1 team, next year.

PK
[/quote]

If he's not better than scratch he's not going to UH to play golf, that's for sure. He needs to be at least a +2-3 or he'll get his a** handed to him.

I have to agree with pinhigh27....in my experience scratch is usually about 3rd spot on a good HS team. On the very competitive teams, I'd be surprised if scratch was top 5.[/quote]

You're talking about the top tier of over 28,000 high schools nationally... Of course you've got sticks at those schools... I don't see the point of this ....

[hoganfan924]

[quote name='4Par' timestamp='1405908567' post='9745553']
[quote name='drewtaylor21' timestamp='1405906659' post='9745263'][quote name='pkwilli1999' timestamp='1405905026' post='9745015']
[quote name='pinhigh27' timestamp='1405881992' post='9742391']
I said at competitive teams. I'm talking about in major metro or suburban areas for the highest division in the area. I know of teams where they have 10+ kids that are scratch, all on one team(I've literally see B team players shoot under par in tournaments on courses rated over par). There's a big difference in the quality of golf between suburbs of a major city(say Austin, TX) vs some random suburb of a smaller city in Kansas. The team I played on, we had 5 guys that were scratch or better and shot par or better in a tournament throughout the year. That's tournament golf too, which is completely different beast than playing with your buddies and shooting the rating.
[/quote]I'm talking about a 6A School in one of the largest cities in the country, Houston. Our number one guy is going to UH, a top 25 D1 team, next year.

PK
[/quote]

If he's not better than scratch he's not going to UH to play golf, that's for sure. He needs to be at least a +2-3 or he'll get his a** handed to him.

I have to agree with pinhigh27....in my experience scratch is usually about 3rd spot on a good HS team. On the very competitive teams, I'd be surprised if scratch was top 5.[/quote]

You're talking about the top tier of over 28,000 high schools nationally... Of course you've got sticks at those schools... I don't see the point of this ....
[/quote]

I don't know where they're getting these ideas either. Just looked up one of the best HS golfers that I personally know, and as a Sophomore, he's a 0.3 index, the clear #2 man on his team that won districts, took 10th at State in Texas in their class, and he was the medalist at districts. Their #1 guy is a +1.8 and #3 or 4 guy I believe is a 3.7. This is a very good, competitive HS team, that will likely send 2 players into D1 programs.

[drewtaylor21]

[quote name='hoganfan924' timestamp='1405910373' post='9745763']
[quote name='4Par' timestamp='1405908567' post='9745553']
[quote name='drewtaylor21' timestamp='1405906659' post='9745263'][quote name='pkwilli1999' timestamp='1405905026' post='9745015']
[quote name='pinhigh27' timestamp='1405881992' post='9742391']
I said at competitive teams. I'm talking about in major metro or suburban areas for the highest division in the area. I know of teams where they have 10+ kids that are scratch, all on one team(I've literally see B team players shoot under par in tournaments on courses rated over par). There's a big difference in the quality of golf between suburbs of a major city(say Austin, TX) vs some random suburb of a smaller city in Kansas. The team I played on, we had 5 guys that were scratch or better and shot par or better in a tournament throughout the year. That's tournament golf too, which is completely different beast than playing with your buddies and shooting the rating.
[/quote]I'm talking about a 6A School in one of the largest cities in the country, Houston. Our number one guy is going to UH, a top 25 D1 team, next year.

PK
[/quote]

If he's not better than scratch he's not going to UH to play golf, that's for sure. He needs to be at least a +2-3 or he'll get his a** handed to him.

I have to agree with pinhigh27....in my experience scratch is usually about 3rd spot on a good HS team. On the very competitive teams, I'd be surprised if scratch was top 5.[/quote]

You're talking about the top tier of over 28,000 high schools nationally... Of course you've got sticks at those schools... I don't see the point of this ....
[/quote]

I don't know where they're getting these ideas either. Just looked up one of the best HS golfers that I personally know, and as a Sophomore, he's a 0.3 index, the clear #2 man on his team that won districts, took 10th at State in Texas in their class, and he was the medalist at districts. Their #1 guy is a +1.8 and #3 or 4 guy I believe is a 3.7. This is a very good, competitive HS team, that will likely send 2 players into D1 programs.
[/quote]

Well I'm getting these ideas from my own high school experience, where I was fortunate enough to be a part of a team that won the WA state 4A team title (suck it Ryan Moore!), as well as from playing against current high schoolers in state and local am tournaments. I realize there will be differences based on where you live and what the distribution of talent is across your city, I'm just saying the teams and players I am aware of here that are state contenders have multiple players better than scratch.