MD/DC/VA Golfers - Twelve Monkeys Mental Divergence

[TheCityGame]

> @Sterling_247 said:

> > @TheCityGame said:

> >

> > This should bother a true low handicapper : "If you are reading this and carrying a handicap 10 or lower… but you are not playing a major tour currently… let's aim at center of the green from anywhere 100 yards and further from the hole."

> >

> Agreed, I would bounce that number back to about 150 yds for me personally, a low handicap should be able to score 150 yds and in

>

>

Left/right, I start shading towards the center pretty quickly, but front/back yardages. . .a green 30 yards deep, I definitely have 2 (or 3) clubs to get me to different depths of that green.

 

Also, a scratch is more different from a 10 then a tour player is from a scratch. Fight me. You put all 3 golfers on a course and I'm betting the scratch scores closer to the pro than he does to the 10. MAYBE not a top top pro on a great day, but a regular journeyman pro. . .yup.

 

 

[willboyrd]

> @TheCityGame said:

> > @Sterling_247 said:

> > > @TheCityGame said:

> > >

> > > This should bother a true low handicapper : "If you are reading this and carrying a handicap 10 or lower… but you are not playing a major tour currently… let's aim at center of the green from anywhere 100 yards and further from the hole."

> > >

> > Agreed, I would bounce that number back to about 150 yds for me personally, a low handicap should be able to score 150 yds and in

> >

> >

> Left/right, I start shading towards the center pretty quickly, but front/back yardages. . .a green 30 yards deep, I definitely have 2 (or 3) clubs to get me to different depths of that green.

>

> Also, a scratch is more different from a 10 then a tour player is from a scratch. Fight me. You put all 3 golfers on a course and I'm betting the scratch scores closer to the pro than he does to the 10. MAYBE not a top top pro on a great day, but a regular journeyman pro. . .yup.

>

>

 

Maybe your worst take I've ever read. Wow, shockingly bad.

 

Since I'm generally a pretty understanding person, I want to give you a shot at redemption. I could maybe get on board if you excluded the top pro/development tours (i.e. PGA, Euro, and Korn Ferry). Is that what you mean by not a top top pro on a great day?

[FAbb]

What's a journeyman pro - like a +6'ish cap from tourney scores? Take a legit scratch, and by my math the difference between +6 and 0 is smaller than the difference between 0 and 10.

[baddomes]

JJ Spaun is definitely a +11.

[dsc123]

 

> This should bother a true low handicapper : "If you are reading this and carrying a handicap 10 or lower… but you are not playing a major tour currently… let's aim at center of the green from anywhere 100 yards and further from the hole." It's ludicrous.>

 

Yeah, that's the part that seems pretty conservative. The authors--both excellent golfers, one played on web.com--say they've modified the way they play since crunching the numbers.

 

[dcmidnight]

What I would really like is 2-3 days in a row to play without the heat index being above 90 - is that too much to ask?

 

Reworking the bag in the offseason...and by offseason I basically mean now. Havent been happy the last few years with the gaps in the bottom of the bag just based on iron lofts for one thing. So I'm taking the 3h out of the bag, putting in a set of clubs with much weaker lofts and then going back to a 3 wedge setup. If I'm going to have a gap or a missing yardage, I'm much happier if its in the 230 yard range then in the lower ranges. I'd rather choke down on a cut 3W trying to hit that kind of shot - that I already have relatively low expectatoins of - then have that issue in the scoring range.

 

New bag will be more like

 

D/3W/3i

5h - 24*

5i - 28*

6i - 32*

7i - 36*

8i - 40*

9i - 44*

PW - 48*

52

56

60

P

 

[FAbb]

City certainly went for a little shock factor with that post, but I don't think he's wrong, for exactly the reason I stated. In terms of the number on the scorecard at the end of the day, he's right.

 

Where I think it's a little more subjective is judging how "different" the golfers are. Anybody that's made it down even near scratch can tell you, it gets harder and harder to shave even fractions of strokes the lower you go. To go from 10 to scratch is VERY impressive, but I feel it's more attainable than a scratch getting to the level of a journeyman tour pro.

 

I'm known for questionable takes, and enjoying the occasional blind shot though, so YMMV.

[dcmidnight]

I'll put this in simpler terms - although I'm not sure if this is what City was trying to get at or not, its how I've always felt.

 

A scratch player is way closer to an 8 hdcp than he is to a +8, I dont care that the numbers are both "8 strokes apart". For the reasons Fabb says. Its exponentially harder to shave those numbers off as you get to "the other side", its not a linear equation IMO.

[TheCityGame]

> @willboyrd said:

> > @TheCityGame said:

> > > @Sterling_247 said:

> > > > @TheCityGame said:

> > > >

> > > > This should bother a true low handicapper : "If you are reading this and carrying a handicap 10 or lower… but you are not playing a major tour currently… let's aim at center of the green from anywhere 100 yards and further from the hole."

> > > >

> > > Agreed, I would bounce that number back to about 150 yds for me personally, a low handicap should be able to score 150 yds and in

> > >

> > >

> > Left/right, I start shading towards the center pretty quickly, but front/back yardages. . .a green 30 yards deep, I definitely have 2 (or 3) clubs to get me to different depths of that green.

> >

> > Also, a scratch is more different from a 10 then a tour player is from a scratch. Fight me. You put all 3 golfers on a course and I'm betting the scratch scores closer to the pro than he does to the 10. MAYBE not a top top pro on a great day, but a regular journeyman pro. . .yup.

> >

> >

>

> Maybe your worst take I've ever read. Wow, shockingly bad.

>

> Since I'm generally a pretty understanding person, I want to give you a shot at redemption. I could maybe get on board if you excluded the top pro/development tours (i.e. PGA, Euro, and Korn Ferry). Is that what you mean by not a top top pro on a great day?

 

Not only are they closer in scoring (and that's just basically math), but their games are way more relatable to pros.

 

I don't buy into the myth of pro golfers. They're one more step on the continuum that starts at 36 handicappers and goes all the way to top touring pros. When you get to scratch, you are a golfer.

 

Golfers get incrementally better, incrementally more consistent. Their distance gets longer. Their "circles" get tighter with every club. Until they're long enough and tight enough to make a living at it.

 

People overestimate how much stroke difference there is between a scratch and a pro. Fairways and greens translates.

 

Sure, more 10's make to scratch than scratches make it to pros. I'm not saying it's easier for a 0 to get to pro, but a scratch golfer's game looks a lot more like a pros than a 10 looks like a scratch. A scratch golfer is getting it done. Now, he's doing it on shorter courses, easier courses but he's still shooting in the 60's (occasionally), making a bunch of birdies, controlling his ball flight, playing smart, occasionally not making any bogies, keeping every ball in play, getting to par 5's in 2. He's probably doing it in tournaments (club, state, region) but he's not doing it at 7600 yards. And he's not doing it as consistently. But it looks similar.

 

I play with 10's all the time who are chunking shots, 3 putting from 15 feet, hitting drives OB, hitting it 220 off the tee. They're a different animal than a scratch golfer. That one 77 they put up every late July when everything goes their way is not an indication of their game.

 

The scoring average of 10 handicappers is about 83/84/85. Scratch golfers are more like 73 (course dependent, but that's ball park). That's what the bottom of the PGA tour average is. Again, on much easier courses, but that guy's game looks a lot more like a pro on a longer course than a guy shooting 85 from 6500 yards.

 

I just pulled up the scores from a scratch golfer at my club. . .last 10 : 70, 72, 75, 71, 75, 75, 74, 70, 69.

This is a guy who is a 8.5 : 86, 78, 84, 89, 80, 86, 84, 85, 87, 77.

 

 

[FAbb]

You and Greg should both get some blood work done, DC. I think there's something in the water at your office. It's the only explanation for the amount of noodling you both do on gapping and set configuration.

 

 

[Puppetmaster]

> @dcmidnight said:

> What I would really like is 2-3 days in a row to play without the heat index being above 90 - is that too much to ask?

>

> Reworking the bag in the offseason...and by offseason I basically mean now. Havent been happy the last few years with the gaps in the bottom of the bag just based on iron lofts for one thing. So I'm taking the 3h out of the bag, putting in a set of clubs with much weaker lofts and then going back to a 3 wedge setup. If I'm going to have a gap or a missing yardage, I'm much happier if its in the 230 yard range then in the lower ranges. I'd rather choke down on a cut 3W trying to hit that kind of shot - that I already have relatively low expectatoins of - then have that issue in the scoring range.

>

> New bag will be more like

>

> D/3W/3i

> 5h - 24*

> 5i - 28*

> 6i - 32*

> 7i - 36*

> 8i - 40*

> 9i - 44*

> PW - 48*

> 52

> 56

> 60

> P

>

 

I gave up both on the long end and short end. I'm basically, D/3W, some hybrid, then 5-PW, 54 & 60. Sometimes I carry 2 hybrids, but not for the distances, one as a true utility club, and the other a tee club. Then again, I also play about 5 times a year now, so the distance variance for each club is more like 30 yards, so those distance gaps take care of themselves. Just not intentionally.

[dcmidnight]

Yeah its weird I'd be on a golf equipment forum and enjoy tinkering with golf equipment. How strange.

[dcmidnight]

> @Puppetmaster said:

> Then again, I also play about 5 times a year now, so the distance variance for each club is more like 30 yards, so those distance gaps take care of themselves. Just not intentionally.

 

This is five times more than I was expecting, so I can double like this.

 

 

[TheCityGame]

> @dcmidnight said:

> What I would really like is 2-3 days in a row to play without the heat index being above 90 - is that too much to ask?

>

> Reworking the bag in the offseason...and by offseason I basically mean now. Havent been happy the last few years with the gaps in the bottom of the bag just based on iron lofts for one thing. So I'm taking the 3h out of the bag, putting in a set of clubs with much weaker lofts and then going back to a 3 wedge setup. If I'm going to have a gap or a missing yardage, I'm much happier if its in the 230 yard range then in the lower ranges. I'd rather choke down on a cut 3W trying to hit that kind of shot - that I already have relatively low expectatoins of - then have that issue in the scoring range.

>

> New bag will be more like

>

> D/3W/3i

> 5h - 24*

> 5i - 28*

> 6i - 32*

> 7i - 36*

> 8i - 40*

> 9i - 44*

> PW - 48*

> 52

> 56

> 60

> P

>

 

I don't understand going 3I then 5H then 5I. I go Hy-4I-5I. Do you just really like that 3I? Is it like a driving iron? There are days when I want to replace the 4 iron with a hybrid, but then days I don't.

 

Anyway, I go 46-50-54-60, but I like what you're thinking. Better to have gaps in the long ranges.

 

I also think 4W is a better option for most people than 3W. I bet for most people it's similar carry and less run out and that's USUALLY what I'm looking for with my 4W.

 

But my par 5's are not par 5s you can run one up. If yours are, 3W might make sense. Or the tee shots where 4W is an option, it's usually because I want a ball to stop at 235, not land at 230 and run 30.

 

[FAbb]

> @dcmidnight said:

> Yeah its weird I'd be on a golf equipment forum and enjoy tinkering with golf equipment. How strange.

 

Somebody needs an extra cup of coffee, to boot up their sarcasm detector

 

Your bag setup listed in your sig looks overwrought.

 

Your proposed setup looks pretty darn standard for a golfer of your ability level.

[TheCityGame]

Speaking of 4W. . .you want to hear a "hit into someone" story?

 

We're playing Saturday. Fairly slow for my club. Hole 13 is a par 3 and we're 2 deep on the tee. Women in front of us are a little slow, but they're keeping pace with the group in front of them. They just do things like park in weird spots and go find the ball, walk back to the cart to get a club, then go back to the ball. After the hole, they put all their clubs away before driving off.

 

They finish 13. We finish 13 but it takes us a long time.

 

Hole 14 is a par 5, (sort of) blind dog leg right, but we check and the women are gone. I pound one down the middle.

 

Our 22 handicapper hits one into some hazard, has to drop. Hits that. Hits again. The 14 handicapper plays his second shot, lay-up. I walk to my ball in the fairway. I'm about 235 from the stick. 220 front edge.

 

I look up at the green and it's completely clear. I grab my 4W, look at the target, smash the 4w, look up and the women are WALKING ONTO THE GREEN FROM THE BACK. They parked around the back (this is correct) and I totally forgot about them and couldn't see them (it's all shaded back there).

 

Fortunately my ball missed the green right, but it could have gone horribly

 

I ran up and apologized. 100% my fault. I think it was a combination of playing with slower golfers and the fact that the women ALL drove around the green and walked back. Like no one got out to hit a chip, or just go look at her putt or look for a ball or anything.

[dcmidnight]

> @FAbb said:

> Somebody needs an extra cup of coffee, to boot up their sarcasm detector

 

Looks like we both do lol

 

 

[dcmidnight]

> @TheCityGame said:

> I don't understand going 3I then 5H then 5I. I go Hy-4I-5I. Do you just really like that 3I? Is it like a driving iron? There are days when I want to replace the 4 iron with a hybrid, but then days I don't.

 

Yeah I realize thats a weird jump. But I finally found a 3 iron that is just fantastic. Something about this club and I have gotten along since Fabb and I played Lakewood...two years ago? Smash it off the tee as a driving iron. I can choke down on it and use it on 200-220 or so yard par 3s. 2nd shot club on longer par 5s - everything. No rhyme or reason, believe me I've told people 100x to "buy hybrids, sell long irons". Its just a club I get along with.

 

[Puppetmaster]

> @dcmidnight said:

> > @Puppetmaster said:

> > Then again, I also play about 5 times a year now, so the distance variance for each club is more like 30 yards, so those distance gaps take care of themselves. Just not intentionally.

>

> This is five times more than I was expecting, so I can double like this.

>

>

 

And you can say that you played with me 20% of this season.

[2moreTerps]

@TheCityGame said:

 

>

> I play with 10's all the time who are chunking shots, 3 putting from 15 feet, hitting drives OB, hitting it 220 off the tee. They're a different animal than a scratch golfer. That one 77 they put up every late July when everything goes their way is not an indication of their game.

>

i think city just called me a 10 handicap. i'm offended.

 

 

[TheCityGame]

> @2moreTerps said:

> @TheCityGame said:

>

> >

> > I play with 10's all the time who are chunking shots, 3 putting from 15 feet, hitting drives OB, hitting it 220 off the tee. They're a different animal than a scratch golfer. That one 77 they put up every late July when everything goes their way is not an indication of their game.

> >

> i think city just called me a 10 handicap. i'm offended.

>

>

I still don't believe you shot 75 in qualifying. Who were you playing with. . .Stevie Wonder?

[XHoop24]

> @dcmidnight said:

> What I would really like is 2-3 days in a row to play without the heat index being above 90 - is that too much to ask?

>

> Reworking the bag in the offseason...and by offseason I basically mean now. Havent been happy the last few years with the gaps in the bottom of the bag just based on iron lofts for one thing. So I'm taking the 3h out of the bag, putting in a set of clubs with much weaker lofts and then going back to a 3 wedge setup. If I'm going to have a gap or a missing yardage, I'm much happier if its in the 230 yard range then in the lower ranges. I'd rather choke down on a cut 3W trying to hit that kind of shot - that I already have relatively low expectatoins of - then have that issue in the scoring range.

>

> New bag will be more like

>

> D/3W/3i

> 5h - 24*

> 5i - 28*

> 6i - 32*

> 7i - 36*

> 8i - 40*

> 9i - 44*

> PW - 48*

> 52

> 56

> 60

> P

>

 

So looks like you have the D, 3W, 3i, 5H already. WIll your current irons work? Looks like wedges will need replaced.

[gregh729]

> @FAbb said:

> You and Greg should both get some blood work done, DC. I think there's something in the water at your office. It's the only explanation for the amount of noodling you both do on gapping and set configuration.

>

>

 

Haha! I just read his post and thought, "Hmmm, that makes sense. I should do that". I could end up with about 10 wedges, one degree difference for each. I have actually been thinking of going back to a 56 SW and 60 LW. Just need to figure the gap between the PW and SW.

 

Good thing I have a lot of meetings today.....

[FAbb]

> @2moreTerps said:

> @TheCityGame said:

>

> >

> > I play with 10's all the time who are chunking shots, 3 putting from 15 feet, hitting drives OB, hitting it 220 off the tee. They're a different animal than a scratch golfer. That one 77 they put up every late July when everything goes their way is not an indication of their game.

> >

> i think city just called me a 10 handicap. i'm offended.

>

>

 

I've seen 2MT look like everything from a near scratch, to an 18. Not just on different days, but within the same round of golf.

[2moreTerps]

> @TheCityGame said:

> > @2moreTerps said:

> > @TheCityGame said:

> >

> > >

> > > I play with 10's all the time who are chunking shots, 3 putting from 15 feet, hitting drives OB, hitting it 220 off the tee. They're a different animal than a scratch golfer. That one 77 they put up every late July when everything goes their way is not an indication of their game.

> > >

> > i think city just called me a 10 handicap. i'm offended.

> >

> >

> I still don't believe you shot 75 in qualifying. Who were you playing with. . .Stevie Wonder?

 

You know my game. If I'm in play I can shoot good scores. You've seen it get better through the year. I played really well. And I got away with a couple bad ones. I pulled it left on 2 and had 9 iron in from the rough. I hit a horrible drive left on 14 that was completely fine. I hit a ton of greens. I don't remember exactly the count but it was more than 10. When I missed a green it was close and i chipped it to 3 feet and made the putt. (Ignoring the last two holes which i'm just erasing from my memory) i only made a couple mistakes. I hit it right over the flag on 3 pretty close ... and was so nervous about running it off that i left it 3 feet short and then missed that one. Those two putts were bad. I was in the green side bunker in 2 on 9 played a nice bunker shot and missed a 5 footer. On 6 i chunked my iron pretty bad. i had like 30 yards from the right rough. I didn't get cute. Just put it middle of the green. And then made about a 25 footer. That was lucky. I hit GW to 10 feet on 10 and made it for my only birdie. Other than that just a lot of solid normal par golf.

[willboyrd]

> @TheCityGame said:

> > @willboyrd said:

> > > @TheCityGame said:

> > > > @Sterling_247 said:

> > > > > @TheCityGame said:

> > > > >

> > > > > This should bother a true low handicapper : "If you are reading this and carrying a handicap 10 or lower… but you are not playing a major tour currently… let's aim at center of the green from anywhere 100 yards and further from the hole."

> > > > >

> > > > Agreed, I would bounce that number back to about 150 yds for me personally, a low handicap should be able to score 150 yds and in

> > > >

> > > >

> > > Left/right, I start shading towards the center pretty quickly, but front/back yardages. . .a green 30 yards deep, I definitely have 2 (or 3) clubs to get me to different depths of that green.

> > >

> > > Also, a scratch is more different from a 10 then a tour player is from a scratch. Fight me. You put all 3 golfers on a course and I'm betting the scratch scores closer to the pro than he does to the 10. MAYBE not a top top pro on a great day, but a regular journeyman pro. . .yup.

> > >

> > >

> >

> > Maybe your worst take I've ever read. Wow, shockingly bad.

> >

> > Since I'm generally a pretty understanding person, I want to give you a shot at redemption. I could maybe get on board if you excluded the top pro/development tours (i.e. PGA, Euro, and Korn Ferry). Is that what you mean by not a top top pro on a great day?

>

> Not only are they closer in scoring (and that's just basically math), but their games are way more relatable to pros.

>

> I don't buy into the myth of pro golfers. They're one more step on the continuum that starts at 36 handicappers and goes all the way to top touring pros. When you get to scratch, you are a golfer.

>

> Golfers get incrementally better, incrementally more consistent. Their distance gets longer. Their "circles" get tighter with every club. Until they're long enough and tight enough to make a living at it.

>

> People overestimate how much stroke difference there is between a scratch and a pro. Fairways and greens translates.

>

> Sure, more 10's make to scratch than scratches make it to pros. I'm not saying it's easier for a 0 to get to pro, but a scratch golfer's game looks a lot more like a pros than a 10 looks like a scratch. A scratch golfer is getting it done. Now, he's doing it on shorter courses, easier courses but he's still shooting in the 60's (occasionally), making a bunch of birdies, controlling his ball flight, playing smart, occasionally not making any bogies, keeping every ball in play, getting to par 5's in 2. He's probably doing it in tournaments (club, state, region) but he's not doing it at 7600 yards. And he's not doing it as consistently. But it looks similar.

>

> I play with 10's all the time who are chunking shots, 3 putting from 15 feet, hitting drives OB, hitting it 220 off the tee. They're a different animal than a scratch golfer. That one 77 they put up every late July when everything goes their way is not an indication of their game.

>

> The scoring average of 10 handicappers is about 83/84/85. Scratch golfers are more like 73 (course dependent, but that's ball park). That's what the bottom of the PGA tour average is. Again, on much easier courses, but that guy's game looks a lot more like a pro on a longer course than a guy shooting 85 from 6500 yards.

>

> I just pulled up the scores from a scratch golfer at my club. . .last 10 : 70, 72, 75, 71, 75, 75, 74, 70, 69.

> This is a guy who is a 8.5 : 86, 78, 84, 89, 80, 86, 84, 85, 87, 77.

>

>

 

I don't think you are really giving proper credence to the fact that a scratch club golfer's index is primarily based off of rounds at one course (which you even stated is MUCH easier than all PGA tracks/set-ups) and a PGA Tour or any major tour player is playing under significantly harder courses/set-ups and different courses each week.

 

We all know that a club index doesn't travel as well as somebody who doesn't belong a club and plays their handicap rounds all over the place. Yes, the handicap system takes this into account as it relates to calculating handicap differential based on course/tees in which the round is played, but there is definitely a benefit of playing vast majority of handicapped rounds at one course versus playing a different course each week.

 

The Tour pro vs scratch vs 10 handicapper is probably a really good choice of the 3 different levels because I think it could definitely be argued the gap between each is similar, but to say definitively a scratch is much closer to a Tour pro (especially PGA Tour pro) than a scratch to a 10 index is going too far IMO.

[baddomes]

Ok what about a scratch who belongs to Oakmont?

[TheCityGame]

> @willboyrd said:

> > @TheCityGame said:

> > > @willboyrd said:

> > > > @TheCityGame said:

> > > > > @Sterling_247 said:

> > > > > > @TheCityGame said:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > This should bother a true low handicapper : "If you are reading this and carrying a handicap 10 or lower… but you are not playing a major tour currently… let's aim at center of the green from anywhere 100 yards and further from the hole."

> > > > > >

> > > > > Agreed, I would bounce that number back to about 150 yds for me personally, a low handicap should be able to score 150 yds and in

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > Left/right, I start shading towards the center pretty quickly, but front/back yardages. . .a green 30 yards deep, I definitely have 2 (or 3) clubs to get me to different depths of that green.

> > > >

> > > > Also, a scratch is more different from a 10 then a tour player is from a scratch. Fight me. You put all 3 golfers on a course and I'm betting the scratch scores closer to the pro than he does to the 10. MAYBE not a top top pro on a great day, but a regular journeyman pro. . .yup.

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > Maybe your worst take I've ever read. Wow, shockingly bad.

> > >

> > > Since I'm generally a pretty understanding person, I want to give you a shot at redemption. I could maybe get on board if you excluded the top pro/development tours (i.e. PGA, Euro, and Korn Ferry). Is that what you mean by not a top top pro on a great day?

> >

> > Not only are they closer in scoring (and that's just basically math), but their games are way more relatable to pros.

> >

> > I don't buy into the myth of pro golfers. They're one more step on the continuum that starts at 36 handicappers and goes all the way to top touring pros. When you get to scratch, you are a golfer.

> >

> > Golfers get incrementally better, incrementally more consistent. Their distance gets longer. Their "circles" get tighter with every club. Until they're long enough and tight enough to make a living at it.

> >

> > People overestimate how much stroke difference there is between a scratch and a pro. Fairways and greens translates.

> >

> > Sure, more 10's make to scratch than scratches make it to pros. I'm not saying it's easier for a 0 to get to pro, but a scratch golfer's game looks a lot more like a pros than a 10 looks like a scratch. A scratch golfer is getting it done. Now, he's doing it on shorter courses, easier courses but he's still shooting in the 60's (occasionally), making a bunch of birdies, controlling his ball flight, playing smart, occasionally not making any bogies, keeping every ball in play, getting to par 5's in 2. He's probably doing it in tournaments (club, state, region) but he's not doing it at 7600 yards. And he's not doing it as consistently. But it looks similar.

> >

> > I play with 10's all the time who are chunking shots, 3 putting from 15 feet, hitting drives OB, hitting it 220 off the tee. They're a different animal than a scratch golfer. That one 77 they put up every late July when everything goes their way is not an indication of their game.

> >

> > The scoring average of 10 handicappers is about 83/84/85. Scratch golfers are more like 73 (course dependent, but that's ball park). That's what the bottom of the PGA tour average is. Again, on much easier courses, but that guy's game looks a lot more like a pro on a longer course than a guy shooting 85 from 6500 yards.

> >

> > I just pulled up the scores from a scratch golfer at my club. . .last 10 : 70, 72, 75, 71, 75, 75, 74, 70, 69.

> > This is a guy who is a 8.5 : 86, 78, 84, 89, 80, 86, 84, 85, 87, 77.

> >

> >

>

> I don't think you are really giving proper credence to the fact that a scratch club golfer's index is primarily based off of rounds at one course (which you even stated is MUCH easier than all PGA tracks/set-ups) and a PGA Tour or any major tour player is playing under significantly harder courses/set-ups and different courses each week.

>

> We all know that a club index doesn't travel as well as somebody who doesn't belong a club and plays their handicap rounds all over the place. Yes, the handicap system takes this into account as it relates to calculating handicap differential based on course/tees in which the round is played, but there is definitely a benefit of playing vast majority of handicapped rounds at one course versus playing a different course each week.

>

> The Tour pro vs scratch vs 10 handicapper is probably a really good choice of the 3 different levels because I think it could definitely be argued the gap between each is similar, but to say definitively a scratch is much closer to a Tour pro (especially PGA Tour pro) than a scratch to a 10 index is going too far IMO.

 

And some people don't give credence to the fact that pros play on perfect greens and on fairways that run for miles. They have green books, caddies, perfectly manicured consistent sand, galleries finding balls, temporary immovable obstructions around greens, flat tee boxes. It's been argued that because of the speed of some of their greens, they don't have pins on slopes as severe as us amateurs play. Most good golfers find putting on fast rolled greens better for scoring.

 

I also don't know a single scratch who doesn't play in state events, qualifiers, A-team matches, grew up playing on different courses, probably played in high school, maybe college. They have lots of golf connections and play on many courses. They travel to play golf because they love it.

 

In other words, the "one trick pony" scratch is not someone I'm familiar with.

 

Here's my recent rounds. Away scores in red. . .

 

Here's recent scores for the scratch I mentioned earlier. . .

 

Here's one of our own. . .

 

[willboyrd]

> @baddomes said:

> Ok what about a scratch who belongs to Oakmont?

 

That's a very fair point and a shows a hole in my logic. I highly doubt the scratch or better Oakmont members play the course under similar set up to that when the PGA tour pros play it though. Also, I would say that Oakmont is somewhat of an exception rather than the rule, as far as course difficulty goes when comparing it Country Club X anywhere in the USA, but fair point nonetheless.

 

> @TheCityGame said:

 

> > I don't think you are really giving proper credence to the fact that a scratch club golfer's index is primarily based off of rounds at one course (which you even stated is MUCH easier than all PGA tracks/set-ups) and a PGA Tour or any major tour player is playing under significantly harder courses/set-ups and different courses each week.

> >

 

>

 

I totally understand your logic and the quantitative argument you've presented with your data, but it's not a wholly quantitative hypothetical. It was an awesome hypothetical question because I definitely think that the '10 handicapper' is the perfect high-end number to pick.

 

Also, I would like to reiterate that my opinion is way more about PGA Tour professionals being insanely good than it is about difference between a 0 index and a 10 index being closer than one would think. I'm a 9.0 index currently and fully understand I'm in an entirely different golfing solar system than you or any other scratch or near scratch player.

 

In my original reply, slamming your take, obviously was using some hyperbole to drum up conflict because conflict is fun for the thread when discussing a meaningless hypothetical sports topic. We will have to agree to disagree on this one.

 

[2moreTerps]

> @willboyrd said:

 

> We all know that a club index doesn't travel as well as somebody who doesn't belong a club and plays their handicap rounds all over the place. Yes, the handicap system takes this into account as it relates to calculating handicap differential based on course/tees in which the round is played, but there is definitely a benefit of playing vast majority of handicapped rounds at one course versus playing a different course each week.

>

i used to think that but i don't anymore. it's has not been my experience/observation. i suspect the reason is that players at clubs play in more actual tournaments and adhere more closely to the rules.