Tour players who cannot putt

[oikos1]

18 minutes ago, manku said:

I was a standard bearer at the US Amateur at Riviera a few years back...every kid could stripe the ball.

 

I asked numerous people...parents, coaches, scorers...what separated them.

 

They all said putting.

 

So I assume anyone on tour is already a great putter relative to all the other wanna be PGA professionals.

 

After all, nearly half your strokes are putts!

^^^ This

 

It's kind of like looking at two opponents on paper.  One side has most of the "stats" in their favor.  No way they could lose.  And then you have to actually go play the game.  This is precisely why golf uses a handicapping system for amateurs to give them a chance.  The better player tends to be the better ball striker. 

 

No question great ball striking gets you closer and on the dance floor more, but Adam Scott is a perfect example of someone who underachieved relative to the PGA Tour because he couldn't putt.

 

 

[Whereismydivot]

Scott McCarron was terrible in college at UCLA.  He actually double hit a putt.   Great ball striker though.   He went to the Broom and did o.k. though.  Berhard Langer also comes to mind.

[Fairway14]

5 hours ago, manku said:

I was a standard bearer at the US Amateur at Riviera a few years back...every kid could stripe the ball.

 

I asked numerous people...parents, coaches, scorers...what separated them.

 

They all said putting.

 

So I assume anyone on tour is already a great putter relative to all the other wanna be PGA professionals.

 

After all, nearly half your strokes are putts!

 

Yes, US. Amateur, State Am's, most all D1 college rosters etc... are filled with players who strike the ball great tee to green. There are thousands of players who consistently hit lots of greens or are next to every green every time they play a round of golf.  Today's equipment has allowed many more players to be excellent ball strikes than ever before.

What separates the amateur winners and the few who actually earn a Tour card from the thousands who don't is the touch shots played around the greens, as well as putting. Consider that a nervous player who feels pressure can speed up his tempo or get out of rhythm a little bit and the modern clubs/balls will still allow him to produce a reasonably good shot. But for the chips-pitches-bunker shots and putting the equipment won't bail out nervous technique, so bogeys are made. This is the difference between a guy shooting 69 (winning) and a guy shooting 73 (missing the cut).

[Santiago Golf]

5 hours ago, oikos1 said:

^^^ This

 

It's kind of like looking at two opponents on paper.  One side has most of the "stats" in their favor.  No way they could lose.  And then you have to actually go play the game.  This is precisely why golf uses a handicapping system for amateurs to give them a chance.  The better player tends to be the better ball striker. 

 

No question great ball striking gets you closer and on the dance floor more, but Adam Scott is a perfect example of someone who underachieved relative to the PGA Tour because he couldn't putt.

 

 

 

Stats would say other wise

 

Approach Play is biggest skill decider ... NCAA D1 college player versus a tour pro in terms of ball striking is very different ... Putting skill is more based on how far your first putt is from than technique

[fowlerscousin]

hate to say it but adam scott, objectively speaking adam scott is not a bad putter, but i think he is the weakest putter of any of the world number 1s in recent times.  he did have an aberration year a couple years ago though.

[TiScape]

Truly astonishing that some of these guys qualified for the PGA Tour not being able to putt 🙄 

[Shilgy]

12 hours ago, Fairway14 said:

More so than putting Tiger's incredible chipping-pitching-bunker play produced the par 5 birdies. 

More so than putting  AND Tiger's incredible chipping-pitching-bunker play…….Tiger called many courses par 68 for him was because he could reach all of the par 5’s in two shots.  So they were the equivalent of par 4’s for him.

Edited October 7, 2021 by Shilgy

[jobin]

Are not all these pro golfers we talk about 'self-selected' over years of play? I  watch many 'wanna-be' boys and girls on the local range: wanna be pro golfers, win $$, get famous,etc.

Over a number of years, junior tourneys, State level tourneys, regional tourneys, college tourneys, etc etc the better putters, and better all-round players, will move up, while those guys/gals who cannot do so well, will fall off the ladder.

 

The folks we see on TV are certainly 'self-selected'.  I'd say the same about young musicians who desire a place in the Berlin/NewYork/London philharmonic: over years of training and performance only the best will survive. The Boise State Symphony ain't the Chicago Symphony Orchestra.

 

[Krt22]

5 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

More so than putting  AND Tiger's incredible chipping-pitching-bunker play…….Tiger called many courses par 68 for him was because he could reach all of the par 5’s in two shots.  So they were the equivalent of par 4’s for him.

Tiger's biggest differentiator was his approach play, specifically approaches from outside 175 yards. He wasn't just reaching long holes (which many consider  just being around the green complex), he was putting them in places where he would have a legit eagle putt or straight forward birdie up and down. The same can be said about longer par 4s. It was his length, accuracy, and course management combined that really helped sperate himself from others as they started picking up length. As I mentioned earlier, Morikawa is the only modern player to remotely sniff prime Tiger's approach game and it has led him to a ton of success already. As his putting gets better he is only going to win more.

[Shilgy]

7 minutes ago, Krt22 said:

Tiger's biggest differentiator was his approach play, specifically approaches from outside 175 yards. He wasn't just reaching long holes (which many consider  just being around the green complex), he was putting them in places where he would have a legit eagle putt or straight forward birdie up and down. The same can be said about longer par 4s. It was his length, accuracy, and course management combined that really helped sperate himself from others as they started picking up length. As I mentioned earlier, Morikawa is the only modern player to remotely sniff prime Tiger's approach game and it has led him to a ton of success already. As his putting gets better he is only going to win more.

Yes, you are correct in that Tigers biggest advantage over other pros was his irons.  But that is not what I responded to. It was how the course played with his length that prompted many to say a certain course was a par 68 for him with his ability to play par 5’s like a par 4 reaching in two.

[dlygrisse]

Orville Moody. He got hot one week and won the US Open.  Other than that, he was admittedly horrible. 

Edited October 7, 2021 by dlygrisse

[BombinJim]

On 10/5/2021 at 7:55 AM, playit said:

As for Watson, I recall from decades ago that he said that he wanted to reach the hole with pace, the ball going five feet past on a routine basis. Because he had zero fear of a five footer. That's stout!

He said something about this philosophy in his book: “I will miss left, I will miss right, but I will never miss short”

[BombinJim]

duplicate post

Edited October 7, 2021 by BombinJim
Duplicate

[Greg_B]

Hogan apparently once said or wrote that golf was two different games, ball-striking and putting, that had little to do with each other. He stated that he thought greens should be like a giant funnel that would deliver a ball landing on them to the next tee box. That's how much he disliked putting.

 

In the '80s/early '90s there was a tour player named Tim Simpson. Tremendous ball striker but a terrible putter. Someone - perhaps Peter Alliss - said words to the effect about him that he could be hugely successful if only he knew that the objective of putting wasn't just to roll the ball close to the hole but instead to actually put it in the cup.

[playit]

1 hour ago, Greg_B said:

Hogan apparently once said or wrote that golf was two different games, ball-striking and putting, that had little to do with each other. He stated that he thought greens should be like a giant funnel that would deliver a ball landing on them to the next tee box. That's how much he disliked putting.

 

In the '80s/early '90s there was a tour player named Tim Simpson. Tremendous ball striker but a terrible putter. Someone - perhaps Peter Alliss - said words to the effect about him that he could be hugely successful if only he knew that the objective of putting wasn't just to roll the ball close to the hole but instead to actually put it in the cup.

 

He was def revered as a supreme ball-striker. And one of those unlucky people who got Lyme Disease. And had brain surgery and back surgery. Must be a fighter to come back and function from all that. I hate ticks!

[Ty_Webb]

Three names spring to my mind. Westwood, Vijay and Boo Weekley. 

 

So much misinformation in this thread. The majority of the difference between a random pair of players is going to be long game, not putting. There are physical attributes that you have to have to be able to hit a driver 300 yards in the air under control. There are physical attributes that you need to have to hit a long iron from 225 to 10 feet from the hole. Not many people have those. There are virtually no physical attributes that you need to have to hole a 10 foot putt. 

 

I don't think it's unreasonable to say that Bryson, DJ and Rory are three of the best drivers of a golf ball on the planet. I'm pretty much certain that there is no better driver of the ball than those three who we've never heard of. Similarly, Morikawa is the best iron player on the planet right now. And Tiger is the best iron player of the past 30 years. Bar none. There is no Joe Schmoe out there who hits his irons better than Tiger at his best. Conversely, who's the best putter in the world? I have absolutely no idea. Did find this article on golf.com about the major series of putting: https://golf.com/news/inside-golfs-newest-high-stakes-event-the-major-series-of-putting/

 

Specific quote here:

 

“It’s not like a Treasure Island putt-putt course—it’s hard. I four-putted the 9th hole, and I’m playing a PGA Tour event this week,” said Sam Ryder, a Tour rookie. “I had no idea what to expect when I came over here, but it’s been great. And this is serious cash.”

Ryder failed to reach the 16-player match-play portion of the pros-only putting tournament, but earlier in the week the Benjamins were flying. A $5,000 entry-fee event drew 66 players, with a 22-year-old ex-UNLV golfer named Taylor Montgomery taking first place and $75,000.

On Monday and Tuesday evening, men and women competed against one other in the pros-only event. Faxon’s Tour buddies John Cook and Tommy Armour III were in the field. So were Kyle Thompson and Colt Knost, who joined Ryder from the Shriners. The final rounds were staged Tuesday evening, where players went head-to-head in 18-hole match play to determine the champ.

As the sun slowly set over the Strip, Faxon KO’d Armour 2 and 1 in a quarterfinal, but Knost clipped Faxon in the semis. In the championship, a little-known pro from Longmont, Colo., named Cole Nygren, who wore khaki shorts and boat shoes, made three aces on the back nine and took down Knost 3 and 2. Nygren graduated from Cal Poly earlier this year and recently fell short in his attempt to qualify for the Web.com tour. The $15,000 payday was the biggest check he’d ever won.

“It’s just incredible,” he said. “I had no expectation to win with so many PGA Tour guys and veterans in the field. I’m taking this money and I’m going to use it to enter a bunch of tournaments.”

Perfect. Because if there’s one thing to be learned at this competition, it’s that there’s nothing more fun than betting on yourself.

 

Someone is going to have to tell me what Taylor Montgomery's and Cole Nygren's PGA Tour stats look like...

[RichieHunt]

Boo Weekley, Charles Warren, Kevin Stadler, etc.

 

 

 

RH

[stinger_gc]

14 hours ago, Shilgy said:

More so than putting  AND Tiger's incredible chipping-pitching-bunker play…….Tiger called many courses par 68 for him was because he could reach all of the par 5’s in two shots.  So they were the equivalent of par 4’s for him.

Augusta was basically a par 68/69 for Tiger from 1997-2002. He was hitting 5-6 irons on Par 5s where guys were hitting 3 woods. In 6 years he won the jacket thrice and his winning scores were -18,-16, and -12. On a par 69 scorecard that's -6,-4, and E.

Fun Fact: Tiger and Ben Crenshaw are the only multiple Masters champions to be double digit under par in all there wins.

I firmly believe whoever breaks the 18 major mark will win the Masters the most out of any major.

Tiger actually finished inside the top 6 at every Masters from 2006-2011, if he made a couple putts on the weekend he could've won 2 of those.

[Shilgy]

1 hour ago, Ty_Webb said:

Three names spring to my mind. Westwood, Vijay and Boo Weekley. 

 

So much misinformation in this thread. The majority of the difference between a random pair of players is going to be long game, not putting. There are physical attributes that you have to have to be able to hit a driver 300 yards in the air under control. There are physical attributes that you need to have to hit a long iron from 225 to 10 feet from the hole. Not many people have those. There are virtually no physical attributes that you need to have to hole a 10 foot putt. 

 

I don't think it's unreasonable to say that Bryson, DJ and Rory are three of the best drivers of a golf ball on the planet. I'm pretty much certain that there is no better driver of the ball than those three who we've never heard of. Similarly, Morikawa is the best iron player on the planet right now. And Tiger is the best iron player of the past 30 years. Bar none. There is no Joe Schmoe out there who hits his irons better than Tiger at his best. Conversely, who's the best putter in the world? I have absolutely no idea. Did find this article on golf.com about the major series of putting: https://golf.com/news/inside-golfs-newest-high-stakes-event-the-major-series-of-putting/

 

Specific quote here:

 

“It’s not like a Treasure Island putt-putt course—it’s hard. I four-putted the 9th hole, and I’m playing a PGA Tour event this week,” said Sam Ryder, a Tour rookie. “I had no idea what to expect when I came over here, but it’s been great. And this is serious cash.”

Ryder failed to reach the 16-player match-play portion of the pros-only putting tournament, but earlier in the week the Benjamins were flying. A $5,000 entry-fee event drew 66 players, with a 22-year-old ex-UNLV golfer named Taylor Montgomery taking first place and $75,000.

On Monday and Tuesday evening, men and women competed against one other in the pros-only event. Faxon’s Tour buddies John Cook and Tommy Armour III were in the field. So were Kyle Thompson and Colt Knost, who joined Ryder from the Shriners. The final rounds were staged Tuesday evening, where players went head-to-head in 18-hole match play to determine the champ.

As the sun slowly set over the Strip, Faxon KO’d Armour 2 and 1 in a quarterfinal, but Knost clipped Faxon in the semis. In the championship, a little-known pro from Longmont, Colo., named Cole Nygren, who wore khaki shorts and boat shoes, made three aces on the back nine and took down Knost 3 and 2. Nygren graduated from Cal Poly earlier this year and recently fell short in his attempt to qualify for the Web.com tour. The $15,000 payday was the biggest check he’d ever won.

“It’s just incredible,” he said. “I had no expectation to win with so many PGA Tour guys and veterans in the field. I’m taking this money and I’m going to use it to enter a bunch of tournaments.”

Perfect. Because if there’s one thing to be learned at this competition, it’s that there’s nothing more fun than betting on yourself.

 

Someone is going to have to tell me what Taylor Montgomery's and Cole Nygren's PGA Tour stats look like...

Getting close….

[ckay]

I watch George Bryant's YouTube videos, and that guy can flat out putt yet he isn't PGA Tour caliber.  I would imagine anyone on the Tour or any Tour for that matter can putt lights out.

[c7015]

22 hours ago, oikos1 said:

 

 

No question great ball striking gets you closer and on the dance floor more, but Adam Scott is a perfect example of someone who underachieved relative to the PGA Tour because he couldn't putt.

 

 

So would you would take Arron Badely's career over Adam Scott ? Badd's clearly one of the best putters out there year after year, but I know who's resume I would rather have.  

 

Adam may have been held back by his putter relative to his other gifts but I'll take his career over Badds or Stricker or Faxon or pretty much any other prodigious putter over the long haul. 

 

Could Adam have won more with a rock solid putter absolutely, but the reason he is in the conversation is because his long game put him at the top of the leaderboards enough times, for us to think he should have won so much more. 

[oikos1]

1 minute ago, c7015 said:

So would you would take Arron Badely's career over Adam Scott ? Badd's clearly one of the best putters out there year after year, but I know who's resume I would rather have.  

 

Adam may have been held back by his putter relative to his other gifts but I'll take his career over Badds or Stricker or Faxon or pretty much any other prodigious putter over the long haul. 

 

Could Adam have won more with a rock solid putter absolutely, but the reason he is in the conversation is because his long game put him at the top of the leaderboards enough times, for us to think he should have won so much more. 

Title of the thread is "Tour Players Who Cannot Putt", not "Who's Career Would You Rather Have".

[JD3]

VJ stunk on the greens. He was the only winner who'd be near the bottom in putting stats for the week. 

[Krt22]

23 hours ago, oikos1 said:

^^^ This

 

It's kind of like looking at two opponents on paper.  One side has most of the "stats" in their favor.  No way they could lose.  And then you have to actually go play the game.  This is precisely why golf uses a handicapping system for amateurs to give them a chance.  The better player tends to be the better ball striker. 

 

No question great ball striking gets you closer and on the dance floor more, but Adam Scott is a perfect example of someone who underachieved relative to the PGA Tour because he couldn't putt.

 

 

This is a flawed argument since all of the stats in golf are based on...actually playing the game. Those stats are very clear on what is the biggest indicator for success

 

"Underachieve" is very subjective, especially given he is a major winner and was a former world #1. If that is underachieving, then sign me up!

[oikos1]

9 minutes ago, Krt22 said:

This is a flawed argument since all of the stats in golf are based on...actually playing the game. Those stats are very clear on what is the biggest indicator for success

 

"Underachieve" is very subjective, especially given he is a major winner and was a former world #1. If that is underachieving, then sign me up!

Of course "underachiever" is subjective.  It's also relative to the PGA Tour.  There were several years he was, statistically, one of the worst putters on tour.  That is the title of the thread.   "Tour pros who cannot putt".  For a strokes gained truther, I would think you would recognize that. 

[Krt22]

26 minutes ago, oikos1 said:

Of course "underachiever" is subjective.  It's also relative to the PGA Tour.  There were several years he was, statistically, one of the worst putters on tour.  That is the title of the thread.   "Tour pros who cannot putt".  For a strokes gained truther, I would think you would recognize that. 

You were replying to (and agreeing with)  a comment that essentially said it's "all about putting". That simply is not true, not at the am level or the professional level. So to say he was an underachiever despite his accomplishments on the course is pretty comical. 

 

And I am not a "truther", that is a silly attempt to make the debate seem subjective when it really is not. The data is the data, if anyone thinks data can be "true or false" , they simply don't understand basic statistical methods.

Edited October 7, 2021 by Krt22

[chigolfer1]

Some of you are making this too hard and literal.  I think it would be a relatively easy exercise to look at the stats and see the largest delta between ballstriking and putting strokes gained stats.  Guys that are in the top 25 in one but down in 100s in putting resulting in a player that's good but, seemingly "should" be much better if they could just putt a little.

 

I'm curious myself now but not enough to actually do the above lol

 

 

Edited October 7, 2021 by chigolfer1

[golfandfishing]

On 10/6/2021 at 9:26 AM, oikos1 said:

^^^ This

 

It's kind of like looking at two opponents on paper.  One side has most of the "stats" in their favor.  No way they could lose.  And then you have to actually go play the game.  This is precisely why golf uses a handicapping system for amateurs to give them a chance.  The better player tends to be the better ball striker. 

 

No question great ball striking gets you closer and on the dance floor more, but Adam Scott is a perfect example of someone who underachieved relative to the PGA Tour because he couldn't putt.

 

 

If putting is the differentiator wouldn’t you say that he overachieved because of his ball striking?

[Shilgy]

Now that Scott has been in the top 50 sg putting the last three years…..and a mighty 18th in 2021……does he lose the under and just become an achiever?

 

Most players on tour have something they excel at compared to their peers and other parts that they may be a bit lacking.  The top guys have more of the plus and less of the minus.

 

That said…..stay on tour that long and you are not under or over achieving anything.  You are what you are which is an excellent player.  
 

Quesion though….does it go back to Hogan this disdain for putting?  As if the great ball strikers are so talented but the putters are lucky? Or at least less skilled?  Why is being a skilled putter looked down at by so many?

[playit]

18 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

Now that Scott has been in the top 50 sg putting the last three years…..and a mighty 18th in 2021……does he lose the under and just become an achiever?

 

Most players on tour have something they excel at compared to their peers and other parts that they may be a bit lacking.  The top guys have more of the plus and less of the minus.

 

That said…..stay on tour that long and you are not under or over achieving anything.  You are what you are which is an excellent player.  
 

Quesion though….does it go back to Hogan this disdain for putting?  As if the great ball strikers are so talented but the putters are lucky? Or at least less skilled?  Why is being a skilled putter looked down at by so many?

 

I assume that you mean that someone who is a great putter but not so good ball striker isn't respected like a great ball striker. If that is true, I go back to golf being two games, tee to green play and then putting. To me, putting is more along the line of the game of pool, there is nothing really athletic about it. Doesn't mean it's easy, lol. Far from it. Many of us know golfers who hit it all over the dang place but are great putters and it's a bit disheartening in competition when you face a great putter due to that. So, I guess there is that 'stain' that carries over to how people perceive pro golfers. Now, great putters on tour, they might not necessarily hit it all over the place (except Seve) but they might just hit it shorter.

 

This is a very interesting thread.