What’s the beef with low scores?

[ray9898]

For me.....I believe the course deserves some defense.  Birdies and Eagles should be earned through superb shot making, not routine.  There should also be enough teeth to punish errant shots keeping those scores in check.

 

-25 isn't that.

[Shak-]

The issue isn't low scores, it's that an abundance of low scores usually means the course isn't set up to appropriately differentiate between how it rewards varying qualities of shot.

 

I believe that the single most important thing you can do to set a course up well for the pros is have the greens be firm. Soft, receptive greens means there's no major difference for a tour player between coming from the rough or the fairway with a mid-short iron. So hitting the fairways becomes something of an irrelevance unless you're blocked out by trees.

 

Additionally, on approach shots the reward for a good shot often isn't much better than it is for an OK one. On soft, receptive greens anything that lands on the green will generally stay there and give you a putt. If they're playing firm and fast you'll get more shots rolling off greens if they're not landed in the correct spot.

 

Chipping onto a firm green is also much more of a challenge than when you can get it to bounce once and stop.

 

Obviously, you have to find a balance. It's no fun to me seeing good mid-iron shots land on the green and bounce off the back. You want greens that are playable from the fairway. I also don't like the chop it out sideways rough... guys should be able to have a go at most shots, so long as they know the ball is gonna come in hot when it lands. You want to give these great players a chance to make great shots, you just want it to be harder for them out of the rough.

 

The weather won't cooperate sometimes. If there's no wind and a course gets plenty of rain, pros are going to have their way with it. The goal most weeks though IMO should be firm and fast and hope mother nature doesn't scupper you too often.

 

Tough golf courses is also where you'll see true greatness shine through. Nobody complained that Birkdale was too easy when Stenson won at -20, nobody said Pebble was too easy when Tiger was the first to finish a US Open double digits under par. We saw how everyone else (except Phil at Birkdale) just wasn't able to play the course to anywhere near the same level. We saw how tough those courses were those weeks, which made what these guys were doing all the more special.

[tacklingdummy]

It is just that many of the courses were not designed for players to be hitting over all the course defenses. So, the only the super long hitters are benefiting exponentially more than the field by hitting it over the all the trouble and using far shorter clubs into the greens with ability to spin the ball better. So no quite a level playing field. However, there are courses that are a more level playing field where the trouble comes into play for all players, but likely won't be used because the tours have only a few courses that they can run tournaments and the venues want the tournaments. Some defenses can be implemented like taller rough, but really it won't do too much. In meantime, those hitting it super long over the trouble have the advantage. 

[Shak-]

I mean, I'd definitely be in favour of bringing in a tour ball to shorten these guys and give the courses back some teeth.

[smashdn]

1 hour ago, tacklingdummy said:

It is just that many of the courses were not designed for players to be hitting over all the course defenses. So, the only the super long hitters are benefiting exponentially more than the field by hitting it over the all the trouble and using far shorter clubs into the greens with ability to spin the ball better. So no quite a level playing field. However, there are courses that are a more level playing field where the trouble comes into play for all players, but likely won't be used because the tours have only a few courses that they can run tournaments and the venues want the tournaments. Some defenses can be implemented like taller rough, but really it won't do too much. In meantime, those hitting it super long over the trouble have the advantage. 

 

It was a course built by a former Tour player in 2004.  It plays 7400+ yards.  If it were a case of players hitting it over the defenses someone didn't do a very good job of designing a a TPC course that could potentially be a tournament stop.

 

The average drive was something like 297 at the BN.  That tells me it isn't a handful of guys hitting it super long (I'd go anything over 300 is that category), but many guys hitting it that long.  (Long is relative I guess.  300 is not long relative to a full PGA Tour field [now]. But it might be long for the course.)  Plus they were playing on wet, sticky zoysia.

 

I'll end with this I guess.  The BN was target golf.  Target golf where what happened to your ball after it hit the target mattered little.  A US Open set up is often target golf where there is extreme uncertainty exists as to what your ball will do after it hits the target.  When a course is benign and wet it removes that whole extra concern for the golfer.

[oikos1]

6 hours ago, Shak- said:

I mean, I'd definitely be in favour of bringing in a tour ball to shorten these guys and give the courses back some teeth.

 

There are plenty of courses that have "some teeth".  The top ten players in 2019 averaged roughly 69.5 in scoring average.  The Tour average was 71.2.  Wanna guess what the Tour scoring average was in 1980?  Or 1990? Or 2000?  Maybe 2010 would be significantly different?

 

Blah, blah, blah.  Golf is still hard.

[BNGL]

9 hours ago, tacklingdummy said:

It is just that many of the courses were not designed for players to be hitting over all the course defenses. So, the only the super long hitters are benefiting exponentially more than the field by hitting it over the all the trouble and using far shorter clubs into the greens with ability to spin the ball better. So no quite a level playing field. However, there are courses that are a more level playing field where the trouble comes into play for all players, but likely won't be used because the tours have only a few courses that they can run tournaments and the venues want the tournaments. Some defenses can be implemented like taller rough, but really it won't do too much. In meantime, those hitting it super long over the trouble have the advantage. 

Do you think these low scores do enough to factor the difficulty of the course conditions from course to course/event to event?

[Teekman]

Personally I have no problem with the low scores, but if they really wanted to give the facade of difficulty they could simply adjust Par like they do every year for the US Open. Also they could add OB throughout the course that’s traditionally marked a hazard or areas on the outer parts of the cart paths.

[Righty to Lefty]

It doesn't matter how "hard" or "easy" the course is pros are still gonna eat it up and shoot good numbers and the best golfer that week will still win.  Also part of the entertainment is watching them go for it and maybe see a possible train wreck.  The fans and casual spectators want to see the pros launch driver to try and drive the green and take crazy lines off the tee box.  My buddy is a caddy on the LPGA tour and he states that the skill of the females blows the males out of the water in regards to consistency but he admits that watching them hit almost every single fairway and green in regulation becomes mundane and boring to a casual spectator.  He noted that they are simply artists the way they work around the course but since most reasonable male golfers can hit it about as far as a female LPGA pro their skillset isn't as appreciated as maybe it should be.  The male pros tend to overpower the course whereas the females methodically work their way.  The Korn Ferry tour this week is at a course that I have played before from the tips and those guys are abusing that course and it is an ole school beast of a course.  

 

My friend who held a European tour card said that his best round ever wasn't his lowest score....it was the round where he hit every fairway and green in regulation and shot 5 under on a tour level course. In my opinion that is the pinnacle of golf regardless of the score posted.  I am often amazed at how much trouble PGA pros often hit into, only to escape and make par. I think Calvin Pete might be the last male pro that I know for sure hit every fairway in a competition round on tour but I may be mistaken.  Golf is hard but, but the pros make it look so easy. Kiawah is a beast of a course and they still eat it up like it's a wide open muni!  

[tacklingdummy]

11 hours ago, smashdn said:

 

It was a course built by a former Tour player in 2004.  It plays 7400+ yards.  If it were a case of players hitting it over the defenses someone didn't do a very good job of designing a a TPC course that could potentially be a tournament stop.

 

The average drive was something like 297 at the BN.  That tells me it isn't a handful of guys hitting it super long (I'd go anything over 300 is that category), but many guys hitting it that long.  (Long is relative I guess.  300 is not long relative to a full PGA Tour field [now]. But it might be long for the course.)  Plus they were playing on wet, sticky zoysia.

 

I'll end with this I guess.  The BN was target golf.  Target golf where what happened to your ball after it hit the target mattered little.  A US Open set up is often target golf where there is extreme uncertainty exists as to what your ball will do after it hits the target.  When a course is benign and wet it removes that whole extra concern for the golfer.

 

I don't have a problem with players eating up a course as long as it is a level playing field and course defends itself well against all players of all distances.  7400+ yards Par 72 is not that long for these many of these guys. They are hitting driver/short irons to pretty much all par 4s. Most courses that were built 10 years or older are not designed well for pro tournaments and distances. They are designed for the masses of people who will be playing them. A few recently built or renovated courses have been designed to hold pro tournaments, but there not many, so, there are limited venues. I worked for well known golf course architect in late 90s. None of the courses that were designed when I was there were designed to defend against today's pro distances.  

 

 

[ChipNRun]

Shooting scores too low? I have no experience with that... 🙄

[klebs01]

I don’t have an issue with low scores per se. the issue is the course set ups that lead to low scores. As has been said, it’s almost always due to soft greens. This leads to a very boring form of golf where fairways don’t matter and all approach shots stop where they land. Firm greens and aprons make the game much more interesting to watch and play. 

[phizzy30]

I think it's great to have some set ups on tour where the guys are posting better than 20 under for the win.  It show cases how great the talent pool is.  It's the old talking heads that have a problem with it.  Birdies and eagles are exciting and what attracts people to the sport.  I also like the way the courses are set up for the majors where it's meant to test players skills to the max.  I mean how boring would it be to see these guys struggle every week at every venue where the winning score is -5?  Snooze fest if you ask me.  Like I said, 4 difficult majors a year plus the Players is a good blend/mix. 

Edited May 22, 2021 by phizzy30

[Arn]

And miss out on gems like this?

 

 

[Shilgy]

12 hours ago, Arn said:

And miss out on gems like this?

 

 

Or having a player drop 125 spots on the leaderboard in two holes? Tringale dropped from 2nd with a quintuple and quadruple on consecutive holes yesterday.  Add a triple two holes before those and it adds up to a 70-82 MC

[Quasimoto]

Now to my way of thinking the PGA this weekend was ideal for scoring/challenge. This, in my mind, is how the professional game should be every week.

[grm24]

On 5/21/2021 at 2:47 AM, tacklingdummy said:

Most courses that were built 10 years or older are not designed well for pro tournaments and distances. They are designed for the masses of people who will be playing them. A few recently built or renovated courses have been designed to hold pro tournaments

Pete Dye was a visionary when he designed the Ocean Course. Course opened in 1991 for the RC. Dye had incorporated  back tees when he designed the course that in 1991 were nearly 7,900 yards. He also softened up the course after it opened. It was way more rough around the edges than it is today. Same as TPC Sawgrass.

Edited May 24, 2021 by grm24

[Shak-]

3 hours ago, Quasimoto said:

Now to my way of thinking the PGA this weekend was ideal for scoring/challenge. This, in my mind, is how the professional game should be every week.

 

It depends on the weather cooperating to that extent but yeah, that was perfect.

 

There was a good score out there every day, but man it could punish you too.

 

That's what top class golf should look like.

[bladehunter]

Great example this week for this threads question.   
 

If Kiawah had no wind , and 6 inches of rain the week before the score is -20 most likely.  And Phil has no chance to win. He’d need to keep up with the target golf kids .
 

  The harder the course the more skill it takes.     Contrary to popular 18 handicap opinion.  It’s harder to shoot par on a course like kiawah than to shoot 65 on a soft but long  course with flat greens and no wind.  Guys who can’t see shots and hit different shapes and trajectories don’t survive on a course like kiawah.  

[Quasimoto]

4 hours ago, bladehunter said:

Great example this week for this threads question.   
 

If Kiawah had no wind , and 6 inches of rain the week before the score is -20 most likely.  And Phil has no chance to win. He’d need to keep up with the target golf kids .
 

  The harder the course the more skill it takes.     Contrary to popular 18 handicap opinion.  It’s harder to shoot par on a course like kiawah than to shoot 65 on a soft but long  course with flat greens and no wind.  Guys who can’t see shots and hit different shapes and trajectories don’t survive on a course like kiawah.  

 

Well if it truly was a soggy course even with LCP then I don’t think -20 would be the number. Maybe -12.  The drives in particular would be around 300-320 max instead of 350-370 due to 50 and 60 yards of bounce and roll. That puts a punishing premium on hitting the correct area of the green from much further back.