What male handicap could win...

thenextnumber1 · July 1, 2007

on lpga?

Hi,

What man handicap player could win on a LPGA Tour Set up?

Do you think a male scratch player could win on it?

Just thought it would be a good discussion.

I think we can learn more from the ladies, because they play courses the same length as we mostly play, and they hit it near enough are distance, maybe abit shorter. I hit about 270.

Cheers.

SadTrombone · July 1, 2007

You'd have to be a "plus" handicap. Those ladies are good.

-mini

hattrick3518 · July 1, 2007

yeah those women are crazy! they dont get the respect the deserve, i would get waxed by any one of them

Johnny · July 1, 2007

I think scratch to -2 has a good chance to do very well on the LPGA.

mrq · July 1, 2007

my Dad's friend played a round with a LPGA player(korean player) in NJ. He said distance was similar but their short game/putting/and ball striking is fabulous.

InspiredGolf · July 1, 2007

A plus 2 would do well especially if he was a long hitter. The courses are so short, the par 5's yardage wise are par 4's for most men who hit it 280 + and straight.

Diesel · July 1, 2007

7000+ yards is "short"...?

slicefixer · July 1, 2007

Well, don't discount the skills of the ladies as they are pretty darn good.........as for the handicap, that is a "loaded question"..........a plus 1 @ Oakmont is a helluva' LOT better than a plus 1 at your local muni..... :) IMOP any reasonably successful mini-tour player could compete quite successfully on the LPGA Tour, but, it's a ridiculous comparison......."apples and oranges" by a MILE.......several miles IMOP... :russian_roulette:

right2left · July 1, 2007

7000+ yards is "short"...?

What 7000+ yrd LPGA layout are you referring to?

I hope none.....cause they don't play any.

JOSEPHLB · July 1, 2007

7000+ yards is "short"...?

7000+ yards is "short"...?

What 7000+ yrd LPGA layout are you referring to?

I hope none.....cause they don't play any.

This weekend's U.S. Women's Open looks to be playing at around 6644 yards.

thenextnumber1 · July 1, 2007

This weeks course is about as long as it gets. When I watch LPGA Events on alot of holes they seem to have short irons in, with drives of 240.

They are amazing accurate, you see them hitting 3,4,5 hybrid clubs like our 8 irons lol.

Id like to go and watch an lpga event, be interesting to see the difference than when i watch a mens event in real life.

Mind you, I wouldent only be going for that reason :russian_roulette: :)

Lake · July 1, 2007

Slice, I've been trying to find something I could disagree with you on now for quite awhile and the day has finally come. Barring the USGA rated the courses correctly and both courses use the GHIN network to calculate handicap, then both +1's should play pretty close at a facility unfamiliar to both players. For example, the local muni would have a course rating of 67 where the Muni player would have to average 66 for 10 of his last 20 scores posted, while the Oakmont player would average 77.3 with Oakmont's course rating of 78.3. The deceiving thing about this is the Muni-player would be probably shooting 6-under par on the scorecard but only 1-under the course rating, while the Oakmont player is shooting well over par on scorecard but 1-under the course rating.

Who would win? The course chosen would probably favor one or the other...plush fairways, slick greens, heavy rough- Oakmont Player...tight fairways(dirt), slow greens, rocks in bunkers, tank-tops with hairy backs- Muni Player.

Drove thru Bagdad, FL on my down to Sandestin last week and thought of Boo Weekley & Bubba Watson to name a couple of guys that grew-up on some very non-Oakmont-like tracks.

I should comment on this thread since I jumped-in!!!! When I worked at East Lake Golf Club in Atlanta, GA, we hosted the U.S. Amateur in 2001 (Bubba Dickerson-FL winner). If I remember the conversation with the official correctly...the definition of a scratch golfer comes from the average score of the field from this event. That being said, I would give any of those "average contestants" a pretty good shot at Eagles Landing Country Club in McDonough, GA during the Sara Lee Invitational(Only LPGA Event I've attended). So, a true scratch golfer would get my money!!! .02 1/2 cents

This excerpt came from a google search:

For the purposes of rating the difficulty of courses through course rating and slope rating, the USGA defines a scratch golfer thusly: "An amateur player who plays to the standard of the stroke play qualifiers competing in the United States Amateur Championship. The male scratch golfer hits his tee shots an average of 250 yards and can reach a 470-yard hole in two shots. The female scratch golfer can hit her tee shots an average of 210 yards and can reach a 400-yard hole in two shots."

slicefixer · July 1, 2007

Slice, I've been trying to find something I could disagree with you on now for quite awhile and the day has finally come. Barring the USGA rated the courses correctly and both courses use the GHIN network to calculate handicap, then both +1's should play pretty close at a facility unfamiliar to both players. For example, the local muni would have a course rating of 67 where the Muni player would have to average 66 for 10 of his last 20 scores posted, while the Oakmont player would average 77.3 with Oakmont's course rating of 78.3. The deceiving thing about this is the Muni-player would be probably shooting 6-under par on the scorecard but only 1-under the course rating, while the Oakmont player is shooting well over par on scorecard but 1-under the course rating.

Who would win? The course chosen would probably favor one or the other...plush fairways, slick greens, heavy rough- Oakmont Player...tight fairways(dirt), slow greens, rocks in bunkers, tank-tops with hairy backs- Muni Player.

Drove thru Bagdad, FL on my down to Sandestin last week and thought of Boo Weekley & Bubba Watson to name a couple of guys that grew-up on some very non-Oakmont-like tracks.

I should comment on this thread since I jumped-in!!!! When I worked at East Lake Golf Club in Atlanta, GA, we hosted the U.S. Amateur in 2001 (Bubba Dickerson-FL winner). If I remember the conversation with the official correctly...the definition of a scratch golfer comes from the average score of the field from this event. That being said, I would give any of those "average contestants" a pretty good shot at Eagles Landing Country Club in McDonough, GA during the Sara Lee Invitational(Only LPGA Event I've attended). So, a true scratch golfer would get my money!!! .02 1/2 cents

This excerpt came from a google search:
For the purposes of rating the difficulty of courses through course rating and slope rating, the USGA defines a scratch golfer thusly: "An amateur player who plays to the standard of the stroke play qualifiers competing in the United States Amateur Championship. The male scratch golfer hits his tee shots an average of 250 yards and can reach a 470-yard hole in two shots. The female scratch golfer can hit her tee shots an average of 210 yards and can reach a 400-yard hole in two shots."

I understand 100% what your saying.........and would agree except that I think the USGA hdcp./course rating/slope is somewhat flawed (not a "diss" against the USGA as determining a courses "difficulty" is a hard thing to determine with any REAL degree of accuracy)........Oakmont is ALWAYS set up TOUGH, as are any number of outstanding golf courses, and I TRULY believe that a scratch at a GOOD course would NOT have developed the "skills" necessary to be able to play to a scratch there or at any other TRUE championship layout......at least from the backs/tipped, etc.......and a scratch at some "normal" muni would have hell breaking 85, maybe even 90, at Oakmont under what they call their "normal" conditons (at least for awhile).......it's just that hard, fair but VERY hard........you'd better have "it all" or your going to have a helluva' time "scoring"...........

I've played courses that were supposedly VERY hard that I didn't find all that difficult under "normal" conditions......Pebble comes to mind immediately........in fact, I can't remember the slope/rating difference between Pebble and Spyglass, but, IF memory serves me it wasn't that much and I found Spyglass to be a LOT harder than Pebble......in fact, 4 of us who were all good players, played Spyglass under relatively benign condtions and I was the only one to break 80.......shot 74 and it felt like 64 compared to the 70 I shot @ Pebble........Now this was 17 years ago and we were using balata, etc., but, Spyglass was a b****......I was hitting woods and long irons to some of the par 4's.......it seemed to play SUBSTANTIALLY longer than the card........Pebble, even though it's located only a few miles away, was MUCH easier.......in fact, we ALL reached the same conclusion........As an experienced professional and good player yourself I'm SURE you understand "where" I'm coming from....... :)

SadTrombone · July 1, 2007

...as for the handicap, that is a "loaded question"..........a plus 1 @ Oakmont is a helluva' LOT better than a plus 1 at your local muni..... ;)

That argument doesn't hold a lot of water.

If they're both turning in their scores like they're supposed to, it shouldn't matter. That's the whole point of the course/slope rating, so harder courses are "weighted" more. For example, depending on the tees I play at my home course, a 74 can have me as a 4, scratch, or plus 3. Does that mean that a plus 3 playing from the middle tees is going to shoot 74? No...he should shoot 67...roughly.

-mini

bsteven43 · July 1, 2007

Hi,

What man handicap player could win on a LPGA Tour Set up?

Do you think a male scratch player could win on it?

Just thought it would be a good discussion.

I think we can learn more from the ladies, because they play courses the same length as we mostly play, and they hit it near enough are distance, maybe abit shorter. I hit about 270.

Cheers.

Back to the original question, my handicap fluctuates between +1.5 and +2.5 and I recently played with a 43 year old journeywoman LPGA player. I was amazed at how good she was. I shot one over and she shot 2 under on her course that was set up at 6600 yds. I for one, don't have anywhere near the short game or putter needed to compete with the LPGA players - especially on only 6500 yard courses. I'd probably have a better chance if the course was 7000 yds. My two cents.

slicefixer · July 1, 2007

...as for the handicap, that is a "loaded question"..........a plus 1 @ Oakmont is a helluva' LOT better than a plus 1 at your local muni..... ;)
That argument doesn't hold a lot of water.

If they're both turning in their scores like they're supposed to, it shouldn't matter. That's the whole point of the course/slope rating, so harder courses are "weighted" more. For example, depending on the tees I play at my home course, a 74 can have me as a 4, scratch, or plus 3. Does that mean that a plus 3 playing from the middle tees is going to shoot 74? No...he should shoot 67...roughly.

-mini

"mini," READ the post above.......then you'll understand......and it DOES "hold water" in REALITY......(maybe NOT in "theory") (btw, do you honestly think a scratch at "Dogpatch Muni" could have shot 78 at Oakmont a coupla' weeks ago?) :friends: :)

peat24 · July 1, 2007

i wish i hit a golf ball like a girl.

jared · July 1, 2007

I had the opportunity to play with Julie Inkster about 8 years ago up in the Bay Area. Over 18 holes she did not miss more than 1 or 2 fairways and ended up shooting 74 from the tips. Course was probably around 6600-6700 yards. The biggest difference between our games obviously was distance. I was hitting 3 sometimes 4 clubs shorter in on par 3's. Her 150 club was about a 6-7 iron. And I would hit my drives at times 50 yards past hers.

If she played the reds and I played the blues she would probably beat me more than 50 percent of the time but from the same tees I would win. What it really would come down to is if you were straight off the tee because you would always be hitting shorter clubs in. Now this isnt to say she is long by tour standards because I do not know what tour standards are for lady golfers but I do know she is quite successful on tour.

Lake · July 2, 2007

Slice,

I looked up Spyglass and it has a course rating of 75.5 from the tips and Pebble has a 73.8.

I've always been skeptical of the USGA's system of rating courses. The Tennessee Golf Association visited my course a couple of years ago with a group of 3 course raters. They played 18, ate lunch, and headed back to Nashville. A few weeks later I received our new course rating/slope info in the mail. I was too busy as usual to follow them around and bug'em about there business but I remember wishing I did.

However, my second sentence in my first response is going to be very difficult to debate.

I played the tips at East Lake almost everyday as an Assistant Pro. East Lake's course rating is around 75 from the tips, has very little OB, good size greens, healthy bermuda rough, and very plush conditions. Now, I play about twice a week as a Head Professional at a course with a course rating of 71.5, a lot shorter, lots of OB, small greens, and not as plush. I shoot the same scores relative to par(72).

I think the main debate that should have a thread of its own is the authenticity of the USGA course rating/slope system. If Spyglass is truly more difficult than its rating than its members will be winning Member/Guest tournaments all over Carmel. ie: if a member at Spyglass averages 75.5 for 10 of there last 20 scores....than they are scratch and should be a + if the course is more difficult than its rating. Or Slice...you four are from Texas...used to getting some roll on the drives...didn't...and had long irons and woods into greens guarded like Alcatraz.

Slice...I agree totally about conditions at a Tour event and Majors. East Lake was not rated during the 3 weeks prior to and after The Tour Championship...totally different course. Oakmont would've def been rated 80+ prior to and during The U.S. Open.

slicefixer · July 2, 2007

Slice,

I looked up Spyglass and it has a course rating of 75.5 from the tips and Pebble has a 73.8.

I've always been skeptical of the USGA's system of rating courses. The Tennessee Golf Association visited my course a couple of years ago with a group of 3 course raters. They played 18, ate lunch, and headed back to Nashville. A few weeks later I received our new course rating/slope info in the mail. I was too busy as usual to follow them around and bug'em about there business but I remember wishing I did.

However, my second sentence in my first response is going to be very difficult to debate.

I played the tips at East Lake almost everyday as an Assistant Pro. East Lake's course rating is around 75 from the tips, has very little OB, good size greens, healthy bermuda rough, and very plush conditions. Now, I play about twice a week as a Head Professional at a course with a course rating of 71.5, a lot shorter, lots of OB, small greens, and not as plush. I shoot the same scores relative to par(72).

I think the main debate that should have a thread of its own is the authenticity of the USGA course rating/slope system. If Spyglass is truly more difficult than its rating than its members will be winning Member/Guest tournaments all over Carmel. ie: if a member at Spyglass averages 75.5 for 10 of there last 20 scores....than they are scratch and should be a + if the course is more difficult than its rating. Or Slice...you four are from Texas...used to getting some roll on the drives...didn't...and had long irons and woods into greens guarded like Alcatraz.

Slice...I agree totally about conditions at a Tour event and Majors. East Lake was not rated during the 3 weeks prior to and after The Tour Championship...totally different course. Oakmont would've def been rated 80+ prior to and during The U.S. Open.

AGREED my friend...... ;) (btw, as your in the TN Section, I gotta' ask a quickie.......do you know Wolcott, Nedrow, and Chapman? IF so, how are they doing as I haven't seen any of them in several years........you can email if your more comfortable.... :friends: :)

cdesana · July 2, 2007

I would think a +1 or +2 that play a lot of competitive golf would be able to compete on the LPGA Tour. For example take some top notched college players that fair well regularly in tournaments.

This is not to take anything awy from the talent of these ladies, they all have game. But a great college male has game and the distance to dominate the par 5's. It would be similar to when Tiger first came on tour, he walked to the 1st tee 2 to 3 under par due to how he ate up the par 5's.

The other thing is that distance is just not an advantage off the tee, its hitting shorter irons in on the par 3's, its having the discipline to hit irons or faiway metals off tees when others have to hit driver and so on..............

DChesler · July 2, 2007

From our longest tees, my home course is rated a 73. Our course superintendent played oakmont this year (he's a 6 handicap) and shot a 92. He also said that he was very pleased with this score.....

thenextnumber1 · July 2, 2007

Well my mate hits it like a girl! He drives it dead straight about the same distance as a small lpga player and just plods along. It so pisses me off because our course suits his game to a tee.

But you put him on a longer course and he struggles to break 85 haha. And his handicap is 8, so maybe slicefixer has a point!

thenextnumber1 · July 2, 2007

Yeh I am from UK.

I hate our system! Get too many Bandits! Because they improve like crazy in the winter and then win all the comps in the summer!

US system is WAY better! Because it is more fair on all other golfers. Plus when you play with friends or something, you have actually got something to play for (gettin ur handicap down) but in britain its useless. Have to wait from september too april for a chance to get your handicap down because there is never any comps in the winter!

Britain sucks for everything lol.

thenewbie · July 2, 2007

I don't know about handicaps, and how they would be applied to the question. . .

but the LPGA players are so frigin good. I love watching the ladies play, partly because a couple are pretty darn cute. OK, mostly because a couple are pretty darn cute.

but its always weird to think about the fact that any one of them would wipe the floor with me. and thats regardless of the distance of the course.

haha, that 12 year old who qualified would have to give me 20 stroked to make it a fair match. much respect to the ladies. ;)

slicefixer · July 2, 2007

I would think a +1 or +2 that play a lot of competitive golf would be able to compete on the LPGA Tour. For example take some top notched college players that fair well regularly in tournaments.

This is not to take anything awy from the talent of these ladies, they all have game. But a great college male has game and the distance to dominate the par 5's. It would be similar to when Tiger first came on tour, he walked to the 1st tee 2 to 3 under par due to how he ate up the par 5's.

The other thing is that distance is just not an advantage off the tee, its hitting shorter irons in on the par 3's, its having the discipline to hit irons or faiway metals off tees when others have to hit driver and so on..............

VERY good post IMOP........on the LPGA Tour "power"/"distance" is a HUGE ADVANTAGE as they have to set up the courses so that even the shorter hitters (majority) can "compete." On the PGA Tour "power" is a PREREQUISITE and the shorter hitters are at a HUGE disadvantage on most courses. I can also VERIFY that a good D-1 college player could EASILY compete successfully on the LPGA Tour as could a great number of scratch/+ handicaps (IF they play a tough course AND are good "tournament players").......they would have a GIGANTIC advantage on a 6,000 - 6,500 yard golf course and could "overpower" the course into submission IF they played well. The ONLY variable would be how their putting/short game held up. BTW, the average LPGA player's short game is NO match for the average PGA Tour players short game. THAT is a "myth".......

Now, with all of that being said, the comparisoon between the two is somewhat ridiculous as they ARE two DIFFERENT "games." The LPGA has some fine players and IS FINALLY "standing on it's own" IMOP...... ;)

oregongolf · July 3, 2007

i caddied at the LPGA Safeway Classic last year and those women definitely do not get enough respect.

they definitely have consistent game. it would take four pretty solid rounds from a +2 to hand an LPGA member their butts.

now... a +2 taking on Michelle Wie, i'll put some money on that ;)

leetch · July 3, 2007

Not sure but I can say that I sure wouldn't want to play Lorena Ochoa or Annika, they'd kick the crap outta me. Even as bad as Michelle Wie is playing right now, in a one-on-one situation with less pressure she'd probably beat up on most scratch men.

madpebs · July 3, 2007

oh the embrassment of wearing those capri type pants though ;)

mngopher · July 5, 2007

This may or may not help the comparison, but Stonebridge, where the LPGA Keebler used to be held, has a good contingency of scratch or near scratch players, mostly younger guys. According to a buddy of mine who is a member, the medalist in club championship qualifying is usually 4-6 over par for 36 holes. They play from the same tees as the LPGA. The last 3 years the tournament was held winnig scores were -17, -16, -21 (sorenstam, webb, sorenstam). The tournament was 54 holes. I don't think the scratch club player would do well. However, I would think a +2 or +3 college guy is another story. Michelle Wie was playing pretty well on the LPGA tour, and still got beat in the top amateur men's events.