Could a Scratch Golfer break 85 at Augusta?

[Shilgy]

3 hours ago, smashdn said:

 

You can be scratch from any tees.  That was the overall point.  As long as you aren't scratch from a very far forward set of tees I suspect you could break 85.  Distance becomes a factor at some point.

Which is why the definition I gave had nothing to do with tee played. I have always understood scratch to be a 0.0, or thereabouts, INDEX. Sure I am currently a 3.8 but if I play the forward most tees rated for men at my club I’m a +2.  But that’s a long ways from scratch in my book. 
Back to the thread....it is likely that a 0.0 can break 85 at Augusta. 

[BuBear09]

I could break 85 easily at Augusta. if anyone doubts me I dare you to take me there and test me

[nsxguy]

36 minutes ago, BuBear09 said:

I could break 85 easily at Augusta. if anyone doubts me I dare you to take me there and test me

 

[cdnglf]

I posted quite a bit on this years ago, but here Is the tldr

 

Course rating in tournament condition was estimated at 78.1, therefore a scratch would have a good chance at breaking 80 and would  have to have bad day to not break 85.
 

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.golfdigest.com/story/how-tough-augusta-knuth/amp

Edited September 1, 2020 by cdnglf

[grm24]

 

 

[bladehunter]

19 hours ago, nsxguy said:

 

That's very interesting but here's the thing.

 

Guys that hit it 265 off the tee certainly have a chance to be scratch from the senior tees. But personally I've never seen anybody with that length play the senior tees. Rightly or wrongly his opponents, from any set of tees, would be "horrified", course handicap adjustment or not.

 

And how good does one feel about their game when they're hitting 4 iron + SW to most every par 4 ? And I certainly wouldn't want to feel badly shooting a 1 under round,,,,,,,,,,,, not playing very well.

 

I mean seriously, where's the challenge ?

 

But the vast majority of players PLAYING from the senior tees are doing so because they can't hit it 200, never mind 265. And the senior tees course rating and slope is often so much less than even par that the players needs to shoot of 5 or 6 under "just" to be scratch. Now a guy with that length who's reasonably straight and can putt probably won't miss many greens and will certainly have more than his share of birdie putts but,,,,,,,,,,,

 

Players with that length and more, like yourself, generally play tees rated at a couple OVER par and a high slope so for YOU to be scratch you "only" have to shoot 3 or 4 over to get a diff of 0.

 

So I guess I'm not all that surprised that there are a few around but that guy really shouldn't be playing the senior tees,,,,,,,,, IMO,,,,,,,

 

 

BTW, welcome back !!!

 

 

Oh I agree.  Which is why I have always callled BS on folks swapping tees based on age.   Always should be based on distance or ability.  But he turned 60 and poof.  Waiting on par 4 greens to clear !  Lol.     I tried to abolish the “age rule” but folks are so scared of everyone moving up in net events that they stick by it .  They believe in the handicap system until.....they don’t.  Lol. 

[doobz]

On 8/20/2020 at 10:18 AM, evolvingwildes said:

Depends on the "type" of scratch golfer. If they're predominantly a grip-it-and-rip-it type where they nuke drives and rely on their wedge game a lot, I don't think so. I think Augusta caters to golfers who have excellent short games and putting.

 

I'm going to say it's the opposite. If he's a legit tourney scratch, the longer he is off the tee the better chance he has. 

[cardia10]

I know of scratch female golfers who have played it from the regular men's tees and shot mid to high 70's. She is an assistant pro locally and she has played it multiple times. Says the greens are tricky but overall it plays much more forgiving from the regular tees. I'm sure tournament tees would be a different animal.

Edited September 4, 2020 by cardia10

[RobotDoctor]

 Oh for crying out loud, this stupid thread again.  Under the original criteria I would bet the farm no way.  If it were a tournament scratch golfer who plays big time amateur events on world class courses (Oakmont, Winged Foot, Bethpage Black, The Ocean Course, and the like) then we're talking a different and rarer breed.  Probably a plus handicap which does not meet the criteria.

 

 

On 8/29/2020 at 1:43 PM, BMC said:

As a point of reference - In 2019 Kevin O'Connell, the mid am champ, and member of our club at the time, +4 handicap, shot 77-71 first time playing Augusta.

 

Kevin O'Connell played several practice rounds with a caddie before the tournament.  He played practice rounds during tournament week as well.  And he is a +4 which is not scratch.  That's 4 shots better than scratch and in tournament conditions which would equate maybe a handful more strokes.  Comparing Kevin O'Connell to the original criteria is beyond a fair comparison.  Then again this is GolfWRX where everyone drives the ball 300+ yards and is a scratch golfer. 

 

Sarcasm aside, I will pose a question I put on on the first few pages of this ridiculous thread.  How many people who believe that Joe, the everyday Scratch Golfer can do this has ever been to Augusta National Golf Club during a Masters tournament?  I know a few have but most people only know this course from watching TV.  I have been there once during a Masters (2015) and I can assure people the course is more than what TV makes it out to be.  The course is more undulating, has greater elevation changes, has incredibly harder greens, and more uneven lies than what TV shows.  For the golfer who plays Augusta National Golf Club under the original criteria: no caddie, no cart, no walking the course beforehand, and 1 hour warmup before the round. Sunday tournament conditions, from the back tees, I say not a chance in HE LL this would be accomplished.  Any reasoning beyond the original criteria is a moot point and not in discussion here per original stipulations.  No goal post moving here.

?

 

 

Edited September 2, 2020 by RobotDoctor

[benno_r]

4 hours ago, RobotDoctor said:

 Oh for crying out loud, this stupid thread again.  Under the original criteria I would bet the farm no way.  If it were a tournament scratch golfer who plays big time amateur events on world class courses (Oakmont, Winged Foot, Bethpage Black, The Ocean Course, and the like) then we're talking a different and rarer breed.  Probably a plus handicap which does not meet the criteria.

 

 

 

Kevin O'Connell played several practice rounds with a caddie before the tournament.  He played practice rounds during tournament week as well.  And he is a +4 which is not scratch.  That's 4 shots better than scratch and in tournament conditions which would equate maybe a handful more strokes.  Comparing Kevin O'Connell to the original criteria is beyond a fair comparison.  Then again this is GolfWRX where everyone drives the ball 300+ yards and is a scratch golfer. 

 

Sarcasm aside, I will pose a question I put on on the first few pages of this ridiculous thread.  How many people who believe that Joe, the everyday Scratch Golfer can do this has ever been to Augusta National Golf Club during a Masters tournament?  I know a few have but most people only know this course from watching TV.  I have been there once during a Masters (2015) and I can assure people the course is more than what TV makes it out to be.  The course is more undulating, has greater elevation changes, has incredibly harder greens, and more uneven lies than what TV shows.  For the golfer who plays Augusta National Golf Club under the original criteria: no caddie, no cart, no walking the course beforehand, and 1 hour warmup before the round. Sunday tournament conditions, from the back tees, I say not a chance in HE LL this would be accomplished.  Any reasoning beyond the original criteria is a moot point and not in discussion here per original stipulations.  No goal post moving here.

?

 

 

 

There are about 30000 golfers in the US with handicaps between +1.0 and 1.0. Are you suggesting not one of them could break 85 as per the original stipulations?

[doobz]

14 hours ago, RobotDoctor said:

 Oh for crying out loud, this stupid thread again.  Under the original criteria I would bet the farm no way.  If it were a tournament scratch golfer who plays big time amateur events on world class courses (Oakmont, Winged Foot, Bethpage Black, The Ocean Course, and the like) then we're talking a different and rarer breed.  Probably a plus handicap which does not meet the criteria.

 

 

 

Kevin O'Connell played several practice rounds with a caddie before the tournament.  He played practice rounds during tournament week as well.  And he is a +4 which is not scratch.  That's 4 shots better than scratch and in tournament conditions which would equate maybe a handful more strokes.  Comparing Kevin O'Connell to the original criteria is beyond a fair comparison.  Then again this is GolfWRX where everyone drives the ball 300+ yards and is a scratch golfer. 

 

Sarcasm aside, I will pose a question I put on on the first few pages of this ridiculous thread.  How many people who believe that Joe, the everyday Scratch Golfer can do this has ever been to Augusta National Golf Club during a Masters tournament?  I know a few have but most people only know this course from watching TV.  I have been there once during a Masters (2015) and I can assure people the course is more than what TV makes it out to be.  The course is more undulating, has greater elevation changes, has incredibly harder greens, and more uneven lies than what TV shows.  For the golfer who plays Augusta National Golf Club under the original criteria: no caddie, no cart, no walking the course beforehand, and 1 hour warmup before the round. Sunday tournament conditions, from the back tees, I say not a chance in HE LL this would be accomplished.  Any reasoning beyond the original criteria is a moot point and not in discussion here per original stipulations.  No goal post moving here.

?

 

 

 

At least two of the courses you listed are harder than Augusta. It's not some mythically difficult course. 12 players finished -10 or better at The Masters last year but you say they need to be playing big time amateur events at Bethpage, where 7 players finished par or better at the 2019 PGA? Agree that under the conditions laid out in the original post it's going to be tougher, but I'd still be shocked if the player you described couldn't break 80, let alone 85.

[Dr. Block]

I have an acquaintance who's a 4 index that broke 80 (78) at Augusta a few years back from the members tee's.  He said it was the best round he ever played.   He said the greens are insanely sloped and difficult, and that if it hadn't of been for his caddie telling him where to keep his approach shots, he would have shot a million. 

[cardoustie]

Sitting at 2.9 right now.

 

I think easily doable from the members tees.   Doable 75% from 7,100.  7,500 becomes a crap shoot if I don't get fairways that are running

[Ferguson]

Scratch is a lifestyle, not a handicap.   

 

  

[Dr. Block]

5 minutes ago, Ferguson said:

Scratch is a lifestyle, not a handicap.   

 

  

In which many imitate but few deliver. 

[benno_r]

6 hours ago, RobotDoctor said:

 

How many of those 30,000 golfers are greater than scratch?  Throw them out.  Let's say now were talking 15,000-20,000 golfers then how many golfers in this group are tournament scratch?  There is a difference being a scratch golfer at a local muni or club measuring less than 7,000 yards and not playing in tournaments.  Throw all those golfers out because I don't believe there isn't a chance this group would break 85 from 7,400 yards under tournament conditions.  Now, for the few thousand that are left (1,000-5,000) add a caddy and a practice round or few then I believe they can break 85, possibly 80.  Without ever seeing the course, playing the course, without local knowledge (especially in reading the greens) this puts great pressure on the golfer.  Throw in a bogey or double bogey here and there and the sense of making up the stroke becomes greater and the pressure the golfer puts on themselves becomes a great disadvantage.  My issue is the original criteria and this is why I don't believe it can be done.  Then again this scenario is impossible in the first place and will never happen.

 

Even if we take the lower case estimate of the 1000 true "scratch golfers", I think it's ludicrous that not even 1 of those 1000 wouldn't break 85 under the original criteria. Doubles will happen, but their target is 85 not 72. Even with 3 doubles, they can still have 6 bogies and 9 pars. I'd have to think they might even get a birdie or 2 in there which will give even more leeway.

[Dr. Block]

deleted

Edited September 2, 2020 by Dr. Block

[lchang]

2 hours ago, benno_r said:

 

Even if we take the lower case estimate of the 1000 true "scratch golfers", I think it's ludicrous that not even 1 of those 1000 wouldn't break 85 under the original criteria. Doubles will happen, but their target is 85 not 72. Even with 3 doubles, they can still have 6 bogies and 9 pars. I'd have to think they might even get a birdie or 2 in there which will give even more leeway.

 

I guess when someone uses the word "Could", you're interpreting it very literally as "greater than 0% chance"?  If so, then heck, a 10 handicap could do it.  Maybe a 20.  

[benno_r]

13 minutes ago, lchang said:

 

I guess when someone uses the word "Could", you're interpreting it very literally as "greater than 0% chance"?  If so, then heck, a 10 handicap could do it.  Maybe a 20.  

 

Exactly. I agree it's not very likely. But it's not impossible. Out of those 1000, I'd be comfortable that at least 5 could do it.

[lchang]

4 hours ago, benno_r said:

 

Exactly. I agree it's not very likely. But it's not impossible. Out of those 1000, I'd be comfortable that at least 5 could do it.

 

So you're saying 0.5% could do it (on their first try, presumably).  So that counts as "could"?  Seems meaningless.  Maybe the question should have been more mathematically precise.  Like does a typical scratch have better than a one-third chance of doing it.  If we're talking about 0.5% chance things in life, I mean, I *could*, in a single episode, flip a coin 8 times and get heads every time, but it's meaningless.  Because equivalently, I *could* flip a coin 800 times and get heads every time.  

[cdnglf]

34 minutes ago, lchang said:

 

So you're saying 0.5% could do it (on their first try, presumably).  So that counts as "could"?  Seems meaningless.  Maybe the question should have been more mathematically precise.  Like does a typical scratch have better than a one-third chance of doing it.  If we're talking about 0.5% chance things in life, I mean, I *could*, in a single episode, flip a coin 8 times and get heads every time, but it's meaningless.  Because equivalently, I *could* flip a coin 800 times and get heads every time.  

 

Much better than 50%. Course rating was estimated at 78. 

[benno_r]

3 hours ago, lchang said:

 

So you're saying 0.5% could do it (on their first try, presumably).  So that counts as "could"?  Seems meaningless.  Maybe the question should have been more mathematically precise.  Like does a typical scratch have better than a one-third chance of doing it.  If we're talking about 0.5% chance things in life, I mean, I *could*, in a single episode, flip a coin 8 times and get heads every time, but it's meaningless.  Because equivalently, I *could* flip a coin 800 times and get heads every time.  

 

Statistically 3.9 of those 1000 scratch markers would flip 8 straight heads. 

 

So how many of those 1000 scratch golfers would have to break 85 for you to be satisfied it was meaningful?

 

2 hours ago, cdnglf said:

 

Much better than 50%. Course rating was estimated at 78. 

 

I was being generous with my 5/1000. Some people seem to hold Augusta in such high regard I didn't want them to get too offended. I actually think the number is closer to 1/10 of the hypothetical 1000 brought up by RD.

 

I actually think if the scenario was presented at a course that people aren't as familiar with, the odds would go down significantly. There wouldn't be many courses that are more familiar to any golf punter than AGNC.

Edited September 3, 2020 by benno_r

[bladehunter]

9 hours ago, lchang said:

 

So you're saying 0.5% could do it (on their first try, presumably).  So that counts as "could"?  Seems meaningless.  Maybe the question should have been more mathematically precise.  Like does a typical scratch have better than a one-third chance of doing it.  If we're talking about 0.5% chance things in life, I mean, I *could*, in a single episode, flip a coin 8 times and get heads every time, but it's meaningless.  Because equivalently, I *could* flip a coin 800 times and get heads every time.  

Good grief.  0.05% ?  Would happen way more often than that.  85.... you’re saying 13 bogeys or more for a true scratch player ? That’s 5 good holes. Keep in mind we have reachable par 5s. And 4 par 3s.  Nearly every scratch player on earth has a running average that is under par on par 3s and par 5s.  85 is just too high.  80 would make your claim hugely more believable. But 85 just isn’t going to hold water. 

[smashdn]

No reason you couldn't luck or skill your way into a birdie on a par three.  There does not appear to be much difference in length between the member tees and tournament tees on no 12.

[Shilgy]

3 hours ago, bladehunter said:

Good grief.  0.05% ?  Would happen way more often than that.  85.... you’re saying 13 bogeys or more for a true scratch player ? That’s 5 good holes. Keep in mind we have reachable par 5s. And 4 par 3s.  Nearly every scratch player on earth has a running average that is under par on par 3s and par 5s.  85 is just too high.  80 would make your claim hugely more believable. But 85 just isn’t going to hold water. 

The scratch player in your post is a great tour pro! Only 21 players averaged under par on par 3 holes this year. 19 last year. More average under par on par 4’s. About twice as many. But you are correct on the par 5 average. The top 200 players averaged 4.80 or better on par fives.

[bladehunter]

1 hour ago, Shilgy said:

The scratch player in your post is a great tour pro! Only 21 players averaged under par on par 3 holes this year. 19 last year. More average under par on par 4’s. About twice as many. But you are correct on the par 5 average. The top 200 players averaged 4.80 or better on par fives.

Lol.  Yea. I should have known. More of my own oddities.  I’m at 2.95 for par 3s and 4.85 for par 5s.  But and it’s a huge BUT...4.39 for par 4s.  That’s since Jan 1.  I was better on par 5s last year.  4.6.   Cap at this moment is 0.6.   I should shut up and go back to work. And pinpoint my par 4 deficiency.  Lol.    By the by. Friend who is +1 at the moment said he shot 79 his first trip around Augusta in school.  And low was 74.  He’s not earth shattering in any way. Just steady eddy.  

[Shilgy]

3 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

Lol.  Yea. I should have known. More of my own oddities.  I’m at 2.95 for par 3s and 4.85 for par 5s.  But and it’s a huge BUT...4.39 for par 4s.  That’s since Jan 1.  I was better on par 5s last year.  4.6.   Cap at this moment is 0.6.   I should shut up and go back to work. And pinpoint my par 4 deficiency.  Lol.    By the by. Friend who is +1 at the moment said he shot 79 his first trip around Augusta in school.  And low was 74.  He’s not earth shattering in any way. Just steady eddy.  

It would, of course, depend on the course played and the player tendencies. Tour boys are playing more difficult par 3’s(and the others as well) than a large majority of us.

[8milespast]

5 hours ago, bladehunter said:

Good grief.  0.05% ?  Would happen way more often than that.  85.... you’re saying 13 bogeys or more for a true scratch player ? That’s 5 good holes. Keep in mind we have reachable par 5s. And 4 par 3s.  Nearly every scratch player on earth has a running average that is under par on par 3s and par 5s.  85 is just too high.  80 would make your claim hugely more believable. But 85 just isn’t going to hold water. 

 

....par 3s are by far the hardest holes, esp when you're playing from the tips

[LukeDonaldsTiger]

20 hours ago, lchang said:

 

I guess when someone uses the word "Could", you're interpreting it very literally as "greater than 0% chance"?  If so, then heck, a 10 handicap could do it.  Maybe a 20.  

 

[Titleist99]

Here's what we do know......In the 2019 Masters in which Tiger Woods won with a score of 275 there were six amateurs' playing in the field and twenty rounds were played. All six players had sub eighty rounds. I'm sure those players were a little better than scratch but the low amateur was Victor Hovland with a score of 72-71-71-71=285.

Most rounds, 85%.... were well under 80. Based on that a scratch on his game should easily score 85.