2023 Honda LPGA Thailand (Feb 23 - 26)

[JungleJimbo]

21 minutes ago, Rapidcat said:

Far too short.

 

Hitting 7 irons for 2nd shots into par 5's.

 

What altitude is the course at?

 

Thayneil's comments have been interesting incl that a more appropriate par is 3 or 4 shots lower.

ELevation of the Siam Country Club "Old Course" = very near sea-level. (Pattaya = seaside?)

 

Based on a quick google-search ... min elevation = 70m... Max Elevation = ~100m.

..https://www.provisualizer.com/courses/siamccpattayaoldcourse.php 

 

Edited February 27, 2023 by JungleJimbo

[Thayneil]

28 minutes ago, Rapidcat said:

Far too short.

 

Hitting 7 irons for 2nd shots into par 5's.

 

What altitude is the course at?

 

Thayneil's comments have been interesting incl that a more appropriate par is 3 or 4 shots lower.

The  course at Siam is about 200 feet above sea level 

not much run most of the year  but for the LPGA  water is kept off and  fairways are drier

[Thayneil]

41 minutes ago, 8602081 said:

 

Thanks for the data..

 

This is around the same length as my local municipal courses.  It gives me hope that I can compete with ladies  😜..

 

most yardages are to the middle of the green but i think these are actual yardages from tee box to  the hole.

 

back pins would account for some of the longer  yardages played

[Thayneil]

On 2/26/2023 at 9:26 PM, Seamus_McDuff said:

 

Don’t think she’ll be playing next week. Field looks closed. 
 

https://www.lpga.com/tournaments/hsbc-womens-world-championship/tournament-entries

 

Her current priority status is not great. Next tournament might not be until Lotte. 

maybe one of the invitees will drop out?

[Stooch]

Finally finished watching the final round, a very nice way for Lila to get her maiden victory.  Sim 300 (nickname for obvious reasons lol) was a little too shaky understandable trying to close her first win.  I figured Jeeno wouldn't be able to put up a really low round again.

[Stooch]

On 2/26/2023 at 10:13 AM, ChronicSlicer said:

Congrats to Lilia!! Her patience has paid off.

Enjoyed the coverage as others have mentioned. Course must have been playing a bit on the easy side, even Muni He shot -10. 

 

The young Rory played great as well, until today, 4 bogies and a double aren't gonna let you raise a trophy on this tour. Looks like the nerves set in, stats were the worst of the week.

 

Glad to see JYK playing well, hope it continues.

 

Despite Lilia winning, I'm most impressed by Maria Fassi this week. This might be her best round of golf yet on tour. She had the driver working hitting 48/56 fairways, only 1 double  bogey in 4 rounds, averaged 28 putts per rd, 70% gir.

Crazy how much easier the game can be playing from the fairway

 

 

Young Rory?  Yuka Saso?  Oh, you mean the new young Rory. lol

[18majors]

35 minutes ago, Stooch said:

Finally finished watching the final round,

 

 

 

Brooke usually did well in this tournament, do you know why she struggled last week?  Both Brooke and Nelly have new equipment recently; but Nelly seemed to play similar to before.

 

 

[North Texas]

3 hours ago, Rapidcat said:

Far too short.

 

Hitting 7 irons for 2nd shots into par 5's.

 

What altitude is the course at?

 

Thayneil's comments have been interesting incl that a more appropriate par is 3 or 4 shots lower.

 

Why is a course that is playing 6300 to 6400 "far too short"? 

 

How many players hit a 7 iron into par 5's during this tournament?

 

Why is 68 or 69 a more appropriate par? 

[Rapidcat]

30 minutes ago, North Texas said:

 

Why is a course that is playing 6300 to 6400 "far too short"? 

 

How many players hit a 7 iron into par 5's during this tournament?

 

Why is 68 or 69 a more appropriate par? 

 

I'm not your forum butler - read the thread.

[18majors]

16 minutes ago, Rapidcat said:

I'm not your forum butler

 

 

Great, to the point!

[North Texas]

55 minutes ago, Rapidcat said:

 

I'm not your forum butler - read the thread.

 

I was genuinely interested in your take regarding the things you said in the post I responded to. 

 

@18majors 

[Stooch]

2 hours ago, 18majors said:

 

 

 

Brooke usually did well in this tournament, do you know why she struggled last week?  Both Brooke and Nelly have new equipment recently, but Nelly seemed to play similar to before.

 

 

 

Brooke has won and Nelly has 2 Top 5's both will be fine, Brooke has these drops in iron accuracy every now and then.  She missed way more greens than usual this week, so doubt it will be winning caliber next event, but she should improve, usually she's gotta see daddy to fix anything mechanical, but next stretch of events I expect her to be back on.  Or another possibility is she and Brit missed on distance with air temp and altitude here with new clubs, which I expect would be figured relatively quickly.  I only worries when I see putting funks and while she probably would like to have dropped a few more birdies, her putter didn't cost here anything this week IMO.

[hebsan]

Disappointed to see Lydia's charge on the back side fall short.  Really shocked to see her s**** that shot out of the sand on 16.  

 

[ChronicSlicer]

2 hours ago, Stooch said:

 

Brooke has won and Nelly has 2 Top 5's both will be fine, Brooke has these drops in iron accuracy every now and then.  She missed way more greens than usual this week, so doubt it will be winning caliber next event, but she should improve, usually she's gotta see daddy to fix anything mechanical, but next stretch of events I expect her to be back on.  Or another possibility is she and Brit missed on distance with air temp and altitude here with new clubs, which I expect would be figured relatively quickly.  I only worries when I see putting funks and while she probably would like to have dropped a few more birdies, her putter didn't cost here anything this week IMO.

I'm almost positive I saw her wearing shorts during the first round. It's likely she thrown off a bit by how much cooler she was, and had additional lower leg movements throwing off the normal "capri swing". She'll be fine 😎

[Stooch]

1 hour ago, ChronicSlicer said:

I'm almost positive I saw her wearing shorts during the first round. It's likely she thrown off a bit by how much cooler she was, and had additional lower leg movements throwing off the normal "capri swing". She'll be fine 😎

You might be on to something with the shorts lol.  Are there flies there?  Brooke is a Northern Ontario girl, where I'm from.  Our mosquitos have been known to take down small military grade drones lol.  You can wear shorts in July and August provide you are not by any marshy land, spoiler alert: it's ALL rock and marsh here lol.  Brooke doesn't wear shorts because of some fashion sense, she doesn't wear shorts out of fear lol.

Edited February 28, 2023 by Stooch

[One Putter]

The happiest person on the planet was the guy who's job it was to inscribe the winner's name on the trophy.

[Rapidcat]

19 hours ago, North Texas said:

 

I was genuinely interested in your take regarding the things you said in the post I responded to. 

 

@18majors 

 

Ok, we’ve been fortunate to have @Thayneil at the course providing his insights and I don’t want to regurgitate what he and others have already provided.

 

I’m not a fan of some of the course set-ups on the LPGAT, I think they allow players that don’t hit the ball far enough to be somewhat competitive. I want to see rewards for long AND accurate ball-striking by athletic players. Driving 230 yards doesn’t cut it for me and even with the manipulation of the average driving distance stats for players (as they’re just a sample of drives and on favourable holes to maximise distance so can give an inflated average imo) we had 19 players ‘averaging’ 245.x yards or less last season.

 

Then we have the daily tee position manipulation that often further reduces playing length and last season so many events were lift and place, making it still easier.

 

I think this event course played too short, Thayneil commented that (I’m going from memory as I’m not going back over earlier posts) that a more appropriate par was 68 or 69 and having watched the 4 round coverage, I concur. There was a comment also (I think) about the fairways being kept dry (so decent amount of run).

 

I also concur with Thayneil on 6,600 yards as a more acceptable playing length, a previous post showed each round’s set-up was in the 6,300’s. BTW, some of the PGAT set-ups for the men can also be too short for my taste but that's another topic.

 

Lastly to par 5’s, I have a dislike when they’re set-up so that average hitters can get home with a drive and a mid iron, that’s simply a par 4. I want to see them as 3 shots to the green with maybe one hole that the longest players can get home in 2, that’s their advantage but they need to still be accurate to use that advantage. I'm being generalistic in this comment, as some severe risk and reward holes can allow shorter 5's to be good.

 

Some people don’t get hung up on what par a hole has designated as it’s the same for all players and I understand the logic, I just don’t like it, a major blind spot for me personally, that’s all. I think it gives a false picture of the player’s performance.

 

You asked how many players hit a 7 iron into par 5’s, well of course I have no way in knowing that as every player’s shot wasn’t shown. I saw a few (Nelly, Jeeno) and I expect there were quite a few more.

 

Although you might not agree with my comments (I don’t mind), I trust my response has satisfied your interest.

 

Cheers and looking forward to Singapore.

[munichop]

A 6300 yd course for the women is like a 7650 yd course for the men.  How often does that happen on the PGA tour at sea level.  6600 for the women would be like 8050 for the men.  That is based on the ratio of their avg driver swing speeds.  SSo the women are still playing longer courses relative to their power than the men.  

[North Texas]

7 hours ago, Rapidcat said:

 

Ok, we’ve been fortunate to have @Thayneil at the course providing his insights and I don’t want to regurgitate what he and others have already provided.

 

I’m not a fan of some of the course set-ups on the LPGAT, I think they allow players that don’t hit the ball far enough to be somewhat competitive. I want to see rewards for long AND accurate ball-striking by athletic players. Driving 230 yards doesn’t cut it for me and even with the manipulation of the average driving distance stats for players (as they’re just a sample of drives and on favourable holes to maximise distance so can give an inflated average imo) we had 19 players ‘averaging’ 245.x yards or less last season.

 

Then we have the daily tee position manipulation that often further reduces playing length and last season so many events were lift and place, making it still easier.

 

I think this event course played too short, Thayneil commented that (I’m going from memory as I’m not going back over earlier posts) that a more appropriate par was 68 or 69 and having watched the 4 round coverage, I concur. There was a comment also (I think) about the fairways being kept dry (so decent amount of run).

 

I also concur with Thayneil on 6,600 yards as a more acceptable playing length, a previous post showed each round’s set-up was in the 6,300’s. BTW, some of the PGAT set-ups for the men can also be too short for my taste but that's another topic.

 

Lastly to par 5’s, I have a dislike when they’re set-up so that average hitters can get home with a drive and a mid iron, that’s simply a par 4. I want to see them as 3 shots to the green with maybe one hole that the longest players can get home in 2, that’s their advantage but they need to still be accurate to use that advantage. I'm being generalistic in this comment, as some severe risk and reward holes can allow shorter 5's to be good.

 

Some people don’t get hung up on what par a hole has designated as it’s the same for all players and I understand the logic, I just don’t like it, a major blind spot for me personally, that’s all. I think it gives a false picture of the player’s performance.

 

You asked how many players hit a 7 iron into par 5’s, well of course I have no way in knowing that as every player’s shot wasn’t shown. I saw a few (Nelly, Jeeno) and I expect there were quite a few more.

 

Although you might not agree with my comments (I don’t mind), I trust my response has satisfied your interest.

 

Cheers and looking forward to Singapore.

 

I appreciate your thoughts and comments. And I did enjoy @Thayneil's insights since he was onsite. 

 

We don't agree on some things but that's all right. My attitude has always been just because you agree with me doesn't mean you are right and just because you disagree with me doesn't mean you are wrong. 

[iBanesto]

"I'm world No. 1?" 😅

 

 

[Rapidcat]

14 hours ago, munichop said:

A 6300 yd course for the women is like a 7650 yd course for the men.  How often does that happen on the PGA tour at sea level.  6600 for the women would be like 8050 for the men.  That is based on the ratio of their avg driver swing speeds.  SSo the women are still playing longer courses relative to their power than the men.  

 

Your computations are sound on the surface but I don't believe they tell the true story.

 

PGA pros throttle back on say 1/3 to 1/2 of their tee shots on non par 3's, hitting trap cut fairway finders, 3 woods or lesser distance clubs because the course doesn't require anything more. They're not being challenged from a distance perspective because of the march of distance gains from newer equipment and so don't often/always use their max swing speed for distance in their tournament play.

 

They should play longer courses with modern equipment but then we have the course real estate situation - no room to expand the length of many holes for male pros' tees. That isn't the case with female pros' tees, they can be extended between the female and male tees on many courses.

 

You can't therefore compare theoretical male/female swing speeds as a base for LPGAT course lengths, the women don't often throttle back unless the LPGAT sets up some ultra short hole but there's reason for male pros to be playing longer courses than they do, although it might not always be do-able.

Edited March 1, 2023 by Rapidcat

[munichop]

So instead of swing speeds we should use an arbitrary opinion to setup course lengths.

[Rapidcat]

46 minutes ago, munichop said:

So instead of swing speeds we should use an arbitrary opinion to setup course lengths.

 

No, you should use reality and swing speeds don't tell that as I have outlined.

 

Does the LPGAT use swing speeds to set up their courses?

 

Your simple criteria just doesn't cut it.

Edited March 1, 2023 by Rapidcat

[munichop]

29 minutes ago, Rapidcat said:

 

No, you should use reality and swing speeds don't tell that as I have outlined.

 

Does the LPGAT use swing speeds to set up their courses?

 

Your simple criteria just doesn't cut it.

And your approach does?  How many tournament courses have you setup?

[Rapidcat]

2 minutes ago, munichop said:

And your approach does?  How many tournament courses have you setup?

 

The same as you have.

 

Your swing speed analogy is no less arbitrary than my thoughts, it's just a calc for a calc's sake imo.

 

Let's give it a rest - we don't agree, so what?

[randywall]

On 2/18/2023 at 4:08 AM, Argonne69 said:

Updated the TV times on the first posting.

 

I didn't have trouble finding the coverage times, but was disappointed that there were no shots of players moving up the leaderboard if they weren't in one of the last 3 groups.