Can a 4-handicap man beat an LPGA pro?

[Forged4ever]

A better indicator is tournament scoring average ONLY.

BINGO!!

 

Couldn't agree more Obes?

 

As Madison brought up earlier, a 4~ cap can't even compete in the Championship flight of our Clubs

 

I don't care how far back ya move the friggin tees??

 

I hope that you're well Bro and it's all Fairways & Greens ⛳️

 

My Best,

Richard

[deadsolid...shank]

A better indicator is tournament scoring average ONLY.

BINGO!!

 

Couldn't agree more Obes?

 

As Madison brought up earlier, a 4~ cap can't even compete in the Championship flight of our Clubs

 

I don't care how far back ya move the friggin tees??

 

I hope that you're well Bro and it's all Fairways & Greens ⛳️

 

My Best,

Richard

 

But nobody is asking if the four could compete in the championship flight at good clubs. Could the theoretical LPGA'er (100th ranked) compete in your championship flight? Especially if you move those tees back.

[vbb]

I'm sure somewhere in this 46 page thread that I didn't read, people have been posting their personal stories. I had the pleasure of playing with a regular golf group of 8-20 people, everything ranging from + cappers to 20s. One day, in the group right behind mine, there was a woman who has been on the Symetra Tour and a season on the LPGA before she fell off, and she was still in her late 20s-early 30s, so not too far off of her glory days. By far the best female golfer I've ever seen. She played the same tees we all played 6550yds, 131 slope. Nothing terribly hard, but challenging enough. Her drives were regularly in the 250yd range, so plenty for the 6500 tees, and her short game and putting were great. She shot 2 over that day and beat everyone except the male plus capper that also was playing that day, who shot a 1 under.

 

I'm not sure your run of the mill 4 capper would be able to beat her, unless it was his home course and she was just seeing it for the first time. If it were a true scratch male player and they both played a course they had never seen before, and they played from 7000 yards, maybe I'd give the scratch player a 50/50 shot, because he'd have mid to short irons into greens and she'd have hybrids or long irons.

[jeffreyl]

All I can say is: watch ANY LPGA pro strike the ball, chip and putt and work her way around a golf course. We all know relatively short hitters that can really play (look at the PGA tour or Senior Tour, as well). The retired LPGA pro that I have played with often, at 60 would be a match for anyone at any tee.... I say this without any reservations. (Including Club Professionals, that I often play with).

 

When I see her, I will ask her this hypothetical ?, just to see the smile I get!

[Guia]

Tour average (PGA) is around 289 yards.

[TheGeekGolfer]

It is harder to 'score better' significantly by moving up a set of tee boxes. It is much more likely to score significantly worse if you move back. If you take a shorter hitter and have them move back a tee box, they are more likely to add more strokes to their score than the person moving up has the ability to gain. Why, it's really math. You can only gain X number of shots putting, especially if you are just an average putter. You have a greater potential to lose shots by moving back a tee box and making bigger numbers, like double and triple bogeys. You can only realistically gain 1 stroke on a hole you normally might par by moving up a tee box and birdie it. However, if you move back a tee box you can put up a double or triple and wipe out 3 holes you might 'gain'.

 

This is why I would take the LPGA player 80% of the time in a match-play situation. The holes they might double bogey won't matter and they'll make it up with their short game. However, in a stroke-play match, I stand by my earlier post.

 

So the 4 handicap male improves if you move him up a box and back a box? This thread has really made me realize how talented 4 handicaps are. They have the ability to carry it 270, they thrive in any course length you throw at them, and they are really just pro golfers who don't have the time to get better. They can do literally anything in this game, other than shave off that ~1 shot necessary to take them to 3.9 or better.

Where did I say that? I said any person has the potential to shoot a better score if they move up a tee box, there is just a greater chance to shoot a significantly worse score if they move back a tee box. You can only make x number of birdies, picking up a few shots. You can make more doubles and triples moving back which will negate any gain, in less holes. than if they had moved up a tee box.

 

You need to go back and reread what you are writing. You are saying that golfers lose lots of shots when they move in one direction that they do not gain back if they move in the other direction, which not only makes no mathematical sense, but contradicts a mountain of data that the USGA has assembled on course ratings. You're basing what happens when the golfer moves up on putting and birdies only, which isn't the ONLY way to improve by a shot.

 

If I play the white tees and am a 4, and go back to the blues and make a couple of bogeys or doubles that I don't "normally" make when I play the whites, then when I come back to the whites and do NOT make those bogeys or doubles, the effect of moving up is proportionally the same as the effect of moving back. Likewise, if I move up to the reds and make a couple of pars on holes that I often bogey from the whites, the effect is again proportionally the same. I don't have to make a lot more birdies from the forward tees; I just have to turn a couple of bogeys into pars. The difference between a par and a bogey is the same as the difference between a bogey and a double; one shot.

 

So from the forward tees, I hit a 7 iron onto a green and make par on a hole that, from farther back I usually have to try to get up and down for par and on which my stroke average is well above par. I don't have to make birdie; I just have to not make bogey or double.

That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying you can usually (most par 4s) gain one stroke on a hole by making birdie, if you move up a tee. However, if you move back a tee and are NOT a long hitter, you can lose more strokes on that same hole (double bogey or worse).

 

The slope rating / hdcp on that tee is 'supposed' to take that into account. However, we are talking about a straight up, no hdcp match.

 

 

[HeadCase1]

Ok, let's assume there is a guy who can carry his driver ON AVERAGE 270, which is PGA Tour AVERAGE, but is still a 4 index. (I play a TON of golf, and I don't see this mythical creatures, but for the sake of argument...) The question becomes WHY is he still a 4 index with that kind of ability? There are only a few possible reasons, and they are pretty simple.

 

1. He doesn't know where his driver is going. (Broadie's data suggests this is a myth; the same set of skills and abilities that enable one to deliver the clubhead to the ball well enough to AVERAGE 270 enable that person to also hit the ball straight. But we'll put THE FACTS aside for a moment, since we now live in post-factual America anyway, and assume an "alternative fact" of a guy who can deliver the club squarely to ball at 115 mph, but doesn't know where the ball is going.)

 

2. He can hit the driver, but mishits the ball off the ground enough to keep him at a 4; his approach game is poor. While this is much more likely than #1 above, it's still a stretch, because this Tour length driver will be hitting shorter clubs into greens, plus we get back to skills and abilities that enabled the 270 carry in the first place. But whatever...

 

3. His short game blows. Maybe he's got a yip problem, whatever.

 

Whatever it is that is going on, this guy is a 4 for a reason. The catch is that if you move him back, whatever his reason is for being a 4 gets WORSE, not better! He has to hit driver more. He has to hit longer clubs on his approaches. He misses more greens and has to rely on his short game more. It doesn't matter, really; make the 4 play more golf, and the difference between him and the scratch or plus player REGARDLESS OF GENDER becomes bigger, not smaller.

 

On one five foot putt, I have a chance to beat a scratch player quite often. Keep moving us back, and my chances get smaller and smaller; take us to 7000 yds, and it's over, and I don't care what the scratch and I average off the tee. He's better than me IN ALL PHASES OF THE GAME; make us play more golf and the differences become clearer and clearer.

 

That so many don't get this only tells me that you just don't play much competitive golf, whether that means tournaments, or for a few bucks at the club.

 

I can't believe the assuredeness with which you speak in this post, and your baiting all-caps useage of 'THE FACTS'. Your first misconception is holding up the PGA Tour as the pinnacle of distance instead of the pinnacle of golfing ability. Who cares what the Tour guys 'average' (not a true average as they use I believe 2 drives per round and don't factor in guys using less than driver). They're on Tour because they have the best total package of golfing skills not because of how far they can hit it. Those guys have the ability to hit less than half of the greens in reg and still sneak in under par. Your second misconception and apparently Broadie's too, (idk who this is) is thinking that there is a straight line correlation between distance and ability. Are you aware that if you handed a club to a large percentage of skilled baseball or hockey players that they would immediately be able to swing it 115? After a while practicing and playing they will be able to carry it 270 with regularity while still scoring poorly. As I've said somewhere before, at those speeds (115+) mis-hits are wildly amplified and a slightly toeish hook or heelish slice (not to mention straight nutted pulls and pushes) can absolutely travel 270 through the air and wind up in bad places. And why do you believe that carrying a drive 270 makes the rest of the game so easy.? You ask how can they be a 4 if they do that regularly? I personally know and play often with a handful of guys that struggle to break 90 but can carry it 270+ all day. A 4 cap is a stud of a player compared to well over 90% of all golfers. There is SO much more to the game than distance, and I'm at a loss as to why anyone would assume because a guy has the flexibility/coordination/strength to hit it 270 in the air, he must also possess touch around the greens, feel on half wedge shots and pitches, green reading ability and speed control with putts.

 

I realize that this rant didn't touch at all upon the subject of this thread so here's a quick tie in. I think those who have argued for the chance (however slight) that a 4 would have against the LPGA pro were assuming that he already plays the back tees and that he either would be moving up or she would be coming back to him. Finally, lemme just say that it's far from impossible for a true 4 with his A game to shoot an under par round and it's also possible for the pro in rare bad form to flirt with 80.. Especially if she's a short hitter and is forced to play 7000+.

[SurfDuffer]

Simple question: If I shoot a 74 and an LPGA player shoots a 75, did I beat the LPGA player or not? Yes or no only please. Thanks.

[CallawayLefty]

Simple question: If I shoot a 74 and an LPGA player shoots a 75, did I beat the LPGA player or not? Yes or no only please. Thanks.

 

I think the answer depends on whether the LPGA player was ranked 75-100 on the tour, whether you're a 4 handicap, and how many drives you carried over 270 yards. I could really go either way on it personally.

[glk]

Ah there is a linear correlation between driving distance and ability.

 

Here's a trackman item on it

http://blog.trackmangolf.com/performance-of-the-average-male-amateur/

 

The R&A also did a study on distance and handicap and found the same.

 

And best of all is the MySpyGolf test of golfers of handicaps on estimating their carry distance for pw, 7i, 5i, driver - bottom line was they were 3 yards over their pw, 7 yds on 7i, 18 yds on 5i, and a whooping 30 yds on their driver (estimated 246 carry and reality was 216). This was an average of all golfers in the test. The higher the cap the worse they estimated and everyone overestimated their driving carry.

 

https://www.Not allowed because of spam.com/Not allowed because of spam-labs-your-distance-reality-check/

[CallawayLefty]

Ah there is a linear correlation between driving distance and ability.

 

Here's a trackman item on it

http://blog.trackman...e-male-amateur/

 

The R&A also did a study on distance and handicap and found the same.

 

And best of all is the MySpyGolf test of golfers of handicaps on estimating their carry distance for pw, 7i, 5i, driver - bottom line was they were 3 yards over their pw, 7 yds on 7i, 18 yds on 5i, and a whooping 30 yds on their driver (estimated 246 carry and reality was 216). This was an average of all golfers in the test. The higher the cap the worse they estimated and everyone overestimated their driving carry.

 

https://www.mygolfsp...-reality-check/

 

Everybody knows 4 handicaps are the +5 handicaps of estimating. My guess is that if they say they carry it 270, then that's how far they carry it. 4 handicaps strike the ball like Moe Norman, they usually just aren't very good chippers and putters because of jobs and kids and such. If they had more time, who knows how far they'd go? I do know this - put a 4 handicap inside of 6,500 yards and he's definitely going to break par.

[BMC]

Ah there is a linear correlation between driving distance and ability.

 

Here's a trackman item on it

http://blog.trackman...e-male-amateur/

 

The R&A also did a study on distance and handicap and found the same.

 

And best of all is the MySpyGolf test of golfers of handicaps on estimating their carry distance for pw, 7i, 5i, driver - bottom line was they were 3 yards over their pw, 7 yds on 7i, 18 yds on 5i, and a whooping 30 yds on their driver (estimated 246 carry and reality was 216). This was an average of all golfers in the test. The higher the cap the worse they estimated and everyone overestimated their driving carry.

 

https://www.mygolfsp...-reality-check/

 

Everybody knows 4 handicaps are the +5 handicaps of estimating. My guess is that if they say they carry it 270, then that's how far they carry it. 4 handicaps strike the ball like Moe Norman, they usually just aren't very good chippers and putters because of jobs and kids and such. If they had more time, who knows how far they'd go? I do know this - put a 4 handicap inside of 6,500 yards and he's definitely going to break par.

 

No. Most 4 caps never break par.

[bluedot]

It is harder to 'score better' significantly by moving up a set of tee boxes. It is much more likely to score significantly worse if you move back. If you take a shorter hitter and have them move back a tee box, they are more likely to add more strokes to their score than the person moving up has the ability to gain. Why, it's really math. You can only gain X number of shots putting, especially if you are just an average putter. You have a greater potential to lose shots by moving back a tee box and making bigger numbers, like double and triple bogeys. You can only realistically gain 1 stroke on a hole you normally might par by moving up a tee box and birdie it. However, if you move back a tee box you can put up a double or triple and wipe out 3 holes you might 'gain'.

 

This is why I would take the LPGA player 80% of the time in a match-play situation. The holes they might double bogey won't matter and they'll make it up with their short game. However, in a stroke-play match, I stand by my earlier post.

 

So the 4 handicap male improves if you move him up a box and back a box? This thread has really made me realize how talented 4 handicaps are. They have the ability to carry it 270, they thrive in any course length you throw at them, and they are really just pro golfers who don't have the time to get better. They can do literally anything in this game, other than shave off that ~1 shot necessary to take them to 3.9 or better.

Where did I say that? I said any person has the potential to shoot a better score if they move up a tee box, there is just a greater chance to shoot a significantly worse score if they move back a tee box. You can only make x number of birdies, picking up a few shots. You can make more doubles and triples moving back which will negate any gain, in less holes. than if they had moved up a tee box.

 

You need to go back and reread what you are writing. You are saying that golfers lose lots of shots when they move in one direction that they do not gain back if they move in the other direction, which not only makes no mathematical sense, but contradicts a mountain of data that the USGA has assembled on course ratings. You're basing what happens when the golfer moves up on putting and birdies only, which isn't the ONLY way to improve by a shot.

 

If I play the white tees and am a 4, and go back to the blues and make a couple of bogeys or doubles that I don't "normally" make when I play the whites, then when I come back to the whites and do NOT make those bogeys or doubles, the effect of moving up is proportionally the same as the effect of moving back. Likewise, if I move up to the reds and make a couple of pars on holes that I often bogey from the whites, the effect is again proportionally the same. I don't have to make a lot more birdies from the forward tees; I just have to turn a couple of bogeys into pars. The difference between a par and a bogey is the same as the difference between a bogey and a double; one shot.

 

So from the forward tees, I hit a 7 iron onto a green and make par on a hole that, from farther back I usually have to try to get up and down for par and on which my stroke average is well above par. I don't have to make birdie; I just have to not make bogey or double.

That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying you can usually (most par 4s) gain one stroke on a hole by making birdie, if you move up a tee. However, if you move back a tee and are NOT a long hitter, you can lose more strokes on that same hole (double bogey or worse).

 

The slope rating / hdcp on that tee is 'supposed' to take that into account. However, we are talking about a straight up, no hdcp match.

 

You just don't get it. "Birdie" is a name for one less stroke than par, ok, and it isn't the only way to save a shot, so quit talking about it that way. If I move up, I can turn doubles into bogeys, and bogeys into pars. If I move back, I can turn pars into bogeys, and bogeys into doubles. It's a couple of shots either way, and the idea that a better player doesn't gain from moving up because they don't make a lot more birdies is silly math. A stroke is a stroke. That has nothing to do with handicaps; it has to do with what you shoot.

[bluedot]

Ok, let's assume there is a guy who can carry his driver ON AVERAGE 270, which is PGA Tour AVERAGE, but is still a 4 index. (I play a TON of golf, and I don't see this mythical creatures, but for the sake of argument...) The question becomes WHY is he still a 4 index with that kind of ability? There are only a few possible reasons, and they are pretty simple.

 

1. He doesn't know where his driver is going. (Broadie's data suggests this is a myth; the same set of skills and abilities that enable one to deliver the clubhead to the ball well enough to AVERAGE 270 enable that person to also hit the ball straight. But we'll put THE FACTS aside for a moment, since we now live in post-factual America anyway, and assume an "alternative fact" of a guy who can deliver the club squarely to ball at 115 mph, but doesn't know where the ball is going.)

 

2. He can hit the driver, but mishits the ball off the ground enough to keep him at a 4; his approach game is poor. While this is much more likely than #1 above, it's still a stretch, because this Tour length driver will be hitting shorter clubs into greens, plus we get back to skills and abilities that enabled the 270 carry in the first place. But whatever...

 

3. His short game blows. Maybe he's got a yip problem, whatever.

 

Whatever it is that is going on, this guy is a 4 for a reason. The catch is that if you move him back, whatever his reason is for being a 4 gets WORSE, not better! He has to hit driver more. He has to hit longer clubs on his approaches. He misses more greens and has to rely on his short game more. It doesn't matter, really; make the 4 play more golf, and the difference between him and the scratch or plus player REGARDLESS OF GENDER becomes bigger, not smaller.

 

On one five foot putt, I have a chance to beat a scratch player quite often. Keep moving us back, and my chances get smaller and smaller; take us to 7000 yds, and it's over, and I don't care what the scratch and I average off the tee. He's better than me IN ALL PHASES OF THE GAME; make us play more golf and the differences become clearer and clearer.

 

That so many don't get this only tells me that you just don't play much competitive golf, whether that means tournaments, or for a few bucks at the club.

 

I can't believe the assuredeness with which you speak in this post, and your baiting all-caps useage of 'THE FACTS'. Your first misconception is holding up the PGA Tour as the pinnacle of distance instead of the pinnacle of golfing ability. Who cares what the Tour guys 'average' (not a true average as they use I believe 2 drives per round and don't factor in guys using less than driver). They're on Tour because they have the best total package of golfing skills not because of how far they can hit it. Those guys have the ability to hit less than half of the greens in reg and still sneak in under par. Your second misconception and apparently Broadie's too, (idk who this is) is thinking that there is a straight line correlation between distance and ability. Are you aware that if you handed a club to a large percentage of skilled baseball or hockey players that they would immediately be able to swing it 115? After a while practicing and playing they will be able to carry it 270 with regularity while still scoring poorly. As I've said somewhere before, at those speeds (115+) mis-hits are wildly amplified and a slightly toeish hook or heelish slice (not to mention straight nutted pulls and pushes) can absolutely travel 270 through the air and wind up in bad places. And why do you believe that carrying a drive 270 makes the rest of the game so easy.? You ask how can they be a 4 if they do that regularly? I personally know and play often with a handful of guys that struggle to break 90 but can carry it 270+ all day. A 4 cap is a stud of a player compared to well over 90% of all golfers. There is SO much more to the game than distance, and I'm at a loss as to why anyone would assume because a guy has the flexibility/coordination/strength to hit it 270 in the air, he must also possess touch around the greens, feel on half wedge shots and pitches, green reading ability and speed control with putts.

 

I realize that this rant didn't touch at all upon the subject of this thread so here's a quick tie in. I think those who have argued for the chance (however slight) that a 4 would have against the LPGA pro were assuming that he already plays the back tees and that he either would be moving up or she would be coming back to him. Finally, lemme just say that it's far from impossible for a true 4 with his A game to shoot an under par round and it's also possible for the pro in rare bad form to flirt with 80.. Especially if she's a short hitter and is forced to play 7000+.

 

There is so much wrong with this post that I'm not even going to try to respond.

[CallawayLefty]

Ah there is a linear correlation between driving distance and ability.

 

Here's a trackman item on it

http://blog.trackman...e-male-amateur/

 

The R&A also did a study on distance and handicap and found the same.

 

And best of all is the MySpyGolf test of golfers of handicaps on estimating their carry distance for pw, 7i, 5i, driver - bottom line was they were 3 yards over their pw, 7 yds on 7i, 18 yds on 5i, and a whooping 30 yds on their driver (estimated 246 carry and reality was 216). This was an average of all golfers in the test. The higher the cap the worse they estimated and everyone overestimated their driving carry.

 

https://www.mygolfsp...-reality-check/

 

Everybody knows 4 handicaps are the +5 handicaps of estimating. My guess is that if they say they carry it 270, then that's how far they carry it. 4 handicaps strike the ball like Moe Norman, they usually just aren't very good chippers and putters because of jobs and kids and such. If they had more time, who knows how far they'd go? I do know this - put a 4 handicap inside of 6,500 yards and he's definitely going to break par.

 

No. Most 4 caps never break par.

 

Maybe you haven't read the last 47 pages, but there's clearly a group of 4 handicaps that only shoot 4 over the course rating when playing from the absolute tips. They carry it over 270 yards, but have so-so iron games and short games, which keeps them at 4 handicaps. They never play anywhere other than the absolute tips though. But in the hypothetical posed in this thread, they move up to 6,500 yards (actually much less because LPGA courses, even though marked at 6,500 yards really only play like 5,500 yards). When they do that, their ability to carry it 270 basically guarantees that they shoot under par. I think the common play is that they either drive the green and two putt, or drive it near the green and kind of hack it up there and two putt for par. And we all know that people ranked in the bottom quartile of the LPGA rankings only average around par.

 

They've done studies you know. 60% of the time, the 4 handicap wins every time.

[PowderedToastMan]

Did you know what Jack Nicklaus, Ben Hogan, Sam Snead, Tom Watson, and Tiger Woods all have in common? They were 4 handicaps in their prime.

[HeadCase1]

Ah there is a linear correlation between driving distance and ability.

 

Here's a trackman item on it

http://blog.trackmangolf.com/performance-of-the-average-male-amateur/

 

The R&A also did a study on distance and handicap and found the same.

 

And best of all is the MySpyGolf test of golfers of handicaps on estimating their carry distance for pw, 7i, 5i, driver - bottom line was they were 3 yards over their pw, 7 yds on 7i, 18 yds on 5i, and a whooping 30 yds on their driver (estimated 246 carry and reality was 216). This was an average of all golfers in the test. The higher the cap the worse they estimated and everyone overestimated their driving carry.

 

https://www.Not allowed because of spam.com/Not allowed because of spam-labs-your-distance-reality-check/

 

The trackman bit was an interesting read but just because it was a fairly large sample size doesn't make it conclusive by any means. Only 1% of their sample had a swing speed of 110 and the avg total distance of all measured was 214. 214... These clearly aren't the people that were being discussed above. As for the MGS test, I'm well aware that most guys don't know how far they hit the ball just from things overheard on the range lol. But just take GolfWRX for example. How many people here do you think would overestimate their driver carry distance by 30 yards? Surely some are delusional. But I would be willing to bet in a community of fanatics like this that a good chunk of the population has spent significant time in simulators and on course with rangefinders nailing down our distances and gappings to a far more precise degree than whoever they tested.

[bluedot]

Ah there is a linear correlation between driving distance and ability.

 

Here's a trackman item on it

http://blog.trackman...e-male-amateur/

 

The R&A also did a study on distance and handicap and found the same.

 

And best of all is the MySpyGolf test of golfers of handicaps on estimating their carry distance for pw, 7i, 5i, driver - bottom line was they were 3 yards over their pw, 7 yds on 7i, 18 yds on 5i, and a whooping 30 yds on their driver (estimated 246 carry and reality was 216). This was an average of all golfers in the test. The higher the cap the worse they estimated and everyone overestimated their driving carry.

 

https://www.mygolfsp...-reality-check/

 

Broadie's research comes to the same conclusions, and it's across all levels of play. "Looking across a range of golfers from amateurs to pros, a clear pattern emerges: Longer hitters tend to be straighter hitters." (p. 103) And Broadie was working off a database of over 2.5 million shots to come up with the conclusion that "long but crooked" is essentially a myth; he found that the same skills and abilities that enable a player to deliver a driver squarely enough at high speed to hit the ball a long way also enable that same player to hit good shots in the rest of his or her game.

 

It just isn't that complicated, and the idea in this thread that there are significant numbers of players who AVERAGE 270 off the tee but still carry a 4 handicap is laughable. But not as laughable as the idea that the farther back they go, the better chance they would have of beating a scratch or plus golfer, regardless of that golfer's gender. It's just silly.

[CallawayLefty]

Ah there is a linear correlation between driving distance and ability.

 

Here's a trackman item on it

http://blog.trackman...e-male-amateur/

 

The R&A also did a study on distance and handicap and found the same.

 

And best of all is the MySpyGolf test of golfers of handicaps on estimating their carry distance for pw, 7i, 5i, driver - bottom line was they were 3 yards over their pw, 7 yds on 7i, 18 yds on 5i, and a whooping 30 yds on their driver (estimated 246 carry and reality was 216). This was an average of all golfers in the test. The higher the cap the worse they estimated and everyone overestimated their driving carry.

 

https://www.mygolfsp...-reality-check/

 

The trackman bit was an interesting read but just because it was a fairly large sample size doesn't make it conclusive by any means. Only 1% of their sample had a swing speed of 110 and the avg total distance of all measured was 214. 214... These clearly aren't the people that were being discussed above. As for the MGS test, I'm well aware that most guys don't know how far they hit the ball just from things overheard on the range lol. But just take GolfWRX for example. How many people here do you think would overestimate their driver carry distance by 30 yards? Surely some are delusional. But I would be willing to bet in a community of fanatics like this that a good chunk of the population has spent significant time in simulators and on course with rangefinders nailing down our distances and gappings to a far more precise degree than whoever they tested.

 

*quietly slinks into the corner along with 99.9% of other golfwrx members*

[HeadCase1]

bluedot -

1) "enable that same player to hit good shots in the rest of his or her game" - 4 caps are solid players who hit a lot of good shots.

2) I don't believe anyone would try to argue that it's a large number of players, but it's still a number.

3) Most averaging 270 carry are already playing the longest sets of tees provided. They wouldn't be moving back.

4) Go shoot a pm to one of the verified long hitters who frequent WRX (ThunderBuzzworth and Rosco come to mind) and ask hem if they could carry it 270 when they were 4's.

[CallawayLefty]

bluedot -

1) "enable that same player to hit good shots in the rest of his or her game" - 4 caps are solid players who hit a lot of good shots.

2) I don't believe anyone would try to argue that it's a large number of players, but it's still a number.

3) Most averaging 270 carry are already playing the longest sets of tees provided. They wouldn't be moving back.

4) Go shoot a pm to one of the verified long hitters who frequent WRX (ThunderBuzzworth and Rosco come to mind) and ask hem if they could carry it 270 when they were 4's.

 

I could carry it 270 when I was a 4, but there was no way in heck I could have beaten an LPGA player.

 

/end thread

[jeffreyl]

Was thinking about the USGA Girls Junior AM, in Fort Wayne in 2013. It was at Sycamore Hills and I was A walking scorer. ( also walking scored USGA boys and later Web.com at Sycamore) Girls were all under 18, played at around 6400 yards. Some of the girls went on to play Division 1 and I know of one that made the LPGA. I have played this Jack Nicklaus Signature many times and it is a very tough test.

A 14 year old (Andrea Lee, now at Stanford) shot 68 to lead the 1st round. I marveled at the talent of these girls, all seemingly tournament tested and the majority, very very good.

I know 4 handicaps at Sycamore, none could have shot that score, even at 6400.

 

I am done posting, as like politics, many opinions are not based on reality, in my opinion!

[deadsolid...shank]

Ah there is a linear correlation between driving distance and ability.

 

Here's a trackman item on it

http://blog.trackman...e-male-amateur/

 

The R&A also did a study on distance and handicap and found the same.

 

And best of all is the MySpyGolf test of golfers of handicaps on estimating their carry distance for pw, 7i, 5i, driver - bottom line was they were 3 yards over their pw, 7 yds on 7i, 18 yds on 5i, and a whooping 30 yds on their driver (estimated 246 carry and reality was 216). This was an average of all golfers in the test. The higher the cap the worse they estimated and everyone overestimated their driving carry.

 

https://www.mygolfsp...-reality-check/

 

Broadie's research comes to the same conclusions, and it's across all levels of play. "Looking across a range of golfers from amateurs to pros, a clear pattern emerges: Longer hitters tend to be straighter hitters." (p. 103) And Broadie was working off a database of over 2.5 million shots to come up with the conclusion that "long but crooked" is essentially a myth; he found that the same skills and abilities that enable a player to deliver a driver squarely enough at high speed to hit the ball a long way also enable that same player to hit good shots in the rest of his or her game.

 

It just isn't that complicated, and the idea in this thread that there are significant numbers of players who AVERAGE 270 off the tee but still carry a 4 handicap is laughable. But not as laughable as the idea that the farther back they go, the better chance they would have of beating a scratch or plus golfer, regardless of that golfer's gender. It's just silly.

 

Did I miss something. What is the infatuation lately with the 270 number?

[HeadCase1]

bluedot -

1) "enable that same player to hit good shots in the rest of his or her game" - 4 caps are solid players who hit a lot of good shots.

2) I don't believe anyone would try to argue that it's a large number of players, but it's still a number.

3) Most averaging 270 carry are already playing the longest sets of tees provided. They wouldn't be moving back.

4) Go shoot a pm to one of the verified long hitters who frequent WRX (ThunderBuzzworth and Rosco come to mind) and ask hem if they could carry it 270 when they were 4's.

 

I could carry it 270 when I was a 4, but there was no way in heck I could have beaten an LPGA player.

 

/end thread

 

For me at least this thread became all about the 270 4 handicap thing and all it entailed lol. I don't expect that you coulda beat an LPGA player bro my tune on that hasn't changed a bit! It's always been, in my estimation, a lightning in a bottle type of thing, a 1/50 chance, a great day vs an abysmal day.

[BMC]

Ah there is a linear correlation between driving distance and ability.

 

Here's a trackman item on it

http://blog.trackman...e-male-amateur/

 

The R&A also did a study on distance and handicap and found the same.

 

And best of all is the MySpyGolf test of golfers of handicaps on estimating their carry distance for pw, 7i, 5i, driver - bottom line was they were 3 yards over their pw, 7 yds on 7i, 18 yds on 5i, and a whooping 30 yds on their driver (estimated 246 carry and reality was 216). This was an average of all golfers in the test. The higher the cap the worse they estimated and everyone overestimated their driving carry.

 

https://www.mygolfsp...-reality-check/

 

Everybody knows 4 handicaps are the +5 handicaps of estimating. My guess is that if they say they carry it 270, then that's how far they carry it. 4 handicaps strike the ball like Moe Norman, they usually just aren't very good chippers and putters because of jobs and kids and such. If they had more time, who knows how far they'd go? I do know this - put a 4 handicap inside of 6,500 yards and he's definitely going to break par.

 

No. Most 4 caps never break par.

 

Maybe you haven't read the last 47 pages, but there's clearly a group of 4 handicaps that only shoot 4 over the course rating when playing from the absolute tips. They carry it over 270 yards, but have so-so iron games and short games, which keeps them at 4 handicaps. They never play anywhere other than the absolute tips though. But in the hypothetical posed in this thread, they move up to 6,500 yards (actually much less because LPGA courses, even though marked at 6,500 yards really only play like 5,500 yards). When they do that, their ability to carry it 270 basically guarantees that they shoot under par. I think the common play is that they either drive the green and two putt, or drive it near the green and kind of hack it up there and two putt for par. And we all know that people ranked in the bottom quartile of the LPGA rankings only average around par.

 

They've done studies you know. 60% of the time, the 4 handicap wins every time.

 

I don't need to read 47 pages when it comes to handicaps. I work at a 54 hole club with 900 members and most are posting to GHIN.

 

Move a 4 form the "tips" to 6500 and they'll need to shoot 3 under their normal scores just to maintain their 4 cap.

 

 

They carry it over 270 yards, but have so-so iron games and short games, which keeps them at 4 handicaps.

 

Ha ha. They move to 6500 and their so-so iron game and short game magically improves?

[iteachgolf]

Ah there is a linear correlation between driving distance and ability.

 

Here's a trackman item on it

http://blog.trackman...e-male-amateur/

 

The R&A also did a study on distance and handicap and found the same.

 

And best of all is the MySpyGolf test of golfers of handicaps on estimating their carry distance for pw, 7i, 5i, driver - bottom line was they were 3 yards over their pw, 7 yds on 7i, 18 yds on 5i, and a whooping 30 yds on their driver (estimated 246 carry and reality was 216). This was an average of all golfers in the test. The higher the cap the worse they estimated and everyone overestimated their driving carry.

 

https://www.mygolfsp...-reality-check/

 

Everybody knows 4 handicaps are the +5 handicaps of estimating. My guess is that if they say they carry it 270, then that's how far they carry it. 4 handicaps strike the ball like Moe Norman, they usually just aren't very good chippers and putters because of jobs and kids and such. If they had more time, who knows how far they'd go? I do know this - put a 4 handicap inside of 6,500 yards and he's definitely going to break par.

 

No. Most 4 caps never break par.

 

Maybe you haven't read the last 47 pages, but there's clearly a group of 4 handicaps that only shoot 4 over the course rating when playing from the absolute tips. They carry it over 270 yards, but have so-so iron games and short games, which keeps them at 4 handicaps. They never play anywhere other than the absolute tips though. But in the hypothetical posed in this thread, they move up to 6,500 yards (actually much less because LPGA courses, even though marked at 6,500 yards really only play like 5,500 yards). When they do that, their ability to carry it 270 basically guarantees that they shoot under par. I think the common play is that they either drive the green and two putt, or drive it near the green and kind of hack it up there and two putt for par. And we all know that people ranked in the bottom quartile of the LPGA rankings only average around par.

 

They've done studies you know. 60% of the time, the 4 handicap wins every time.

 

I don't need to read 47 pages when it comes to handicaps. I work at a 54 hole club with 900 members and most are posting to GHIN.

 

Move a 4 form the "tips" to 6500 and they'll need to shoot 3 under their normal scores just to maintain their 4 cap.

 

 

They carry it over 270 yards, but have so-so iron games and short games, which keeps them at 4 handicaps.

 

Ha ha. They move to 6500 and their so-so iron game and short game magically improves?

 

He's being sarcastic. Very sarcastic

[HeadCase1]

Deadsolid -

GeekGolfer threw 270 carry out there as one of his stipulations for what he would need in a player to bet on them, bluedot immediately took exception with the idea that anyone who carries it that far could be a 4, and it quickly became an tangential theme of the thread. WRX *shrug*

[CallawayLefty]

Ah there is a linear correlation between driving distance and ability.

 

Here's a trackman item on it

http://blog.trackman...e-male-amateur/

 

The R&A also did a study on distance and handicap and found the same.

 

And best of all is the MySpyGolf test of golfers of handicaps on estimating their carry distance for pw, 7i, 5i, driver - bottom line was they were 3 yards over their pw, 7 yds on 7i, 18 yds on 5i, and a whooping 30 yds on their driver (estimated 246 carry and reality was 216). This was an average of all golfers in the test. The higher the cap the worse they estimated and everyone overestimated their driving carry.

 

https://www.mygolfsp...-reality-check/

 

Everybody knows 4 handicaps are the +5 handicaps of estimating. My guess is that if they say they carry it 270, then that's how far they carry it. 4 handicaps strike the ball like Moe Norman, they usually just aren't very good chippers and putters because of jobs and kids and such. If they had more time, who knows how far they'd go? I do know this - put a 4 handicap inside of 6,500 yards and he's definitely going to break par.

 

No. Most 4 caps never break par.

 

Maybe you haven't read the last 47 pages, but there's clearly a group of 4 handicaps that only shoot 4 over the course rating when playing from the absolute tips. They carry it over 270 yards, but have so-so iron games and short games, which keeps them at 4 handicaps. They never play anywhere other than the absolute tips though. But in the hypothetical posed in this thread, they move up to 6,500 yards (actually much less because LPGA courses, even though marked at 6,500 yards really only play like 5,500 yards). When they do that, their ability to carry it 270 basically guarantees that they shoot under par. I think the common play is that they either drive the green and two putt, or drive it near the green and kind of hack it up there and two putt for par. And we all know that people ranked in the bottom quartile of the LPGA rankings only average around par.

 

They've done studies you know. 60% of the time, the 4 handicap wins every time.

 

I don't need to read 47 pages when it comes to handicaps. I work at a 54 hole club with 900 members and most are posting to GHIN.

 

Move a 4 form the "tips" to 6500 and they'll need to shoot 3 under their normal scores just to maintain their 4 cap.

 

 

They carry it over 270 yards, but have so-so iron games and short games, which keeps them at 4 handicaps.

 

Ha ha. They move to 6500 and their so-so iron game and short game magically improves?

 

lol

[CallawayLefty]

 

He's being sarcastic. Very sarcastic

 

I thought my Anchorman quote would be a dead giveaway. Guess not?

[BMC]

He's being sarcastic. Very sarcastic

 

I thought my Anchorman quote would be a dead giveaway. Guess not?

 

Well, that escalated quickly. I killed a 4 handicapper with a Trident.