Kingsley #2 (Scoring AVG be for the Pros?) Best Sub 162 yard hole in US?

[BCowan]

If there was a Kingsley Invitational with PGA tour players competing for a good size purse (hypothetically, not going to happen) what do you think the scoring average would be on the 2nd hole for the week, given firm conditions and good weather?  I was fortunate enough to play it 4 times in 3 days. I needed a calculator to add up how many over par i was.  It is one the best short Par 3's I have played.  I looked forward to the 2nd hole, prior to arriving on the first green. 

So given those that have played it, what do you think the scoring average would be with PGA pros?

[Neil Johnston]

I may be in the minority, but I think the better hypothetical is the score at the par 3 9th. I found that hole to be about 3-4x more difficult than the 2nd. But that could be because my short game wasn't good enough to prevent a huge number around the green when I inevitably missed the target, a problem the pros wouldn't have.

[Jason Thurman]

3.07

[JC Jones]

I'm with Thurman on this one.  With the exception of the new tee on #9, the yardage on either hole doesn't get any longer than 165.  Absent strong wind, the pros are hitting at most an 8 iron and likely a wedge to 9 iron.  Those are big enough targets with those clubs in the hands of a pro.

Moreover, the strength of a really good golfer is knowing where to miss.  An appropriate miss on either hole would give a pro an strong chance at an up and down but no worse than a bogey. 

[BHoover]

In my four rounds at Kingsley last year, I birdied #9 twice.  To quote Jackie Chiles, "Two under par? That's pretty good.  That's what the pros shoot, isn't it?"  "If they're lucky!"

But I think only managed a single par on #2, followed by a bunch of "others."

[Tim Bert]

I think #2 would be par or better. Lots of birdies for those guys from that distance and while the wind is a steady factor there it rarely howls enought to alter that. I think many would out it very close and I think the recovery shot for those is easy enough to make no worse than bogey in all but a few instances.

I think #9 would be easier than #2 unless they used the new ridiculous 200+ tee or possibly if they out the pin on the high portion of the green. Either low part of the boomerang from 165 or less would be open season for those guys.

[Bill Seitz]

Pretty much depends entirely on the pin positions.  For #9, to a lesser extent, it would depend on the tees used.  Middle back pin on two would yield a ton of birdies, but I could see the average being a half stroke to a full stroke higher to a front pin.  My guess is that two and nine would have the widest variance between scoring averages from one day to the next, barring something crazy like using the back left pin on 13. 

And I agree with Jason regarding the pros knowing where to miss.  I think regardless of the pins, you'd see very few players miss #2 to the left, and just about every ball that didn't end up on the green on nine would be somewhere inside the boomerang. 

[Jud_T]

#2 is the harder hole by a fair margin IMO as there's no bailout whatsoever.  The only really bad spot on 9 is going long from the west tee ( right from the south tee).  If you err on the side of the elbow on 9, a pro will get no worse than bogey and more likely par or birdie, something that can't be said for # 2.

[Terry Lavin]

Thank God we have another Kingsley thread.  It's been weeks and weeks!

[Josh Tarble]

What was the scoring average for the Postage Stamp the last time the Open Championship was at Royal Troon? 

I don't think #2 would be much different than that.

[Jim Tang]

In my two visits to Kingsley Club for some reason I have played # 2 very well.  I feel like # 9 is much more terrifying. I think the tee shot at # 9 is an all or nothing type of tee shot, whereas, with # 2, I feel like there is a bit of room to miss the green and have an easier recovery than at # 9.  I could be wrong there.  I have only played 5 magical rounds at Kingsley, and as stated, played # 2 well, so I was not forced to recover very often.

What a great place Kingsley Club is!

[Brett Hochstein]

Jud,

There's an area about 20 yards short you can reasonably hit to.  The pitch or putt up is then fairly easy to the dangerous middle and front pins, and you are looking at no worse than bogey.  Yeah, that's right--laying up on a 130 yard hole.  If the flag is anywhere back though, you just have to go for it.  Aim for the middle.

Not sure where your bailout is on 9 from the south tees, unless you can hit a pretty high shot into it.  One of the bunkers?

[BCowan]

''There's an area about 20 yards short you can reasonably hit to''

That was similar to my strategy the last time I played it, maybe 5 yards short of the green due to lack of confidence in my short irons.  I proceeded to 3 or 4 putt after.  

My guess would be right around 3.0

[Bob_Garvelink]

I have only played the course twice but I would imagine the pros would do pretty well on # 2.  Although it causes many of us amateurs problems....their would be quite of few birdies in my opinion.  They would aim for the middle and make quite a few putts...that's why their pros!

[Jud_T]

Brett,

I'm not sure where the layup on 2 is that you're referring to unless it's the red tee box as there's a sharp slope that falls all the way off to the right if you're right of center of the "fairway" in the slightest.

[BCowan]

J

   What is your scoring average guess?

     Back to the hypothetical, I would highly enjoy drinking a Bell's or Arcadia Ales in the bleachers watching D Johnson, Phil Mill, B Watson, and Z Johnson play the hole.   

[John Kirk]

I was a member of the Kingsley Club for about eight years.  For four years I compiled a hole-by-hole scoring for all my rounds.  In 35 rounds at Kingsley between 2005 and 2008, my scoring averages on the par 3 holes were:

#2 - 3.49
#5 - 3.48
#9 - 3.34
#11 - 3.51
#16 - 3.43

I generally played the longest or second longest tees on these holes.  I almost always played #9 (~160) and #11 (~170) from the back tees.  My conclusion is that all of these par 3s are pretty difficult; none of them are easy.  It's very surprising that #11 yielded the highest score.

I agree with Jason Thurman about an average score for the pros of about 3.00, but it would be much higher in a typical strong crosswind.

[BCowan]

#11 has a very tough green with ridge running through it.  Love the look of it.  I am not surprised by that scoring average being the highest.  

That is cool you kept the numbers...

[Tim Bert]

I kept scoring averages for my first two seasons before my game deteriorated and my scores were too depressing.  As a low teens handicap at that time my averages were as follows:

2 - 4.42
5 - 3.82
9 - 4.21
11 - 3.64
16 - 3.7

The golds make a huge difference on 11 so JK's scores don't surprise me. 11 is pretty straightforward from the whites and blues for someone that makes bogeys on every hole anyway.  I would have thought 5 would be my lowest scoring average.

[Bill Seitz]

John, what were your averages on 14 and 15?  I'd have to look mine up from last year, but they were pretty close, and that's only because I seemed to have a pretty bad year on 14.  Sorry to hear you're no longer a member, but I'm sure it wasn't easy getting to your various clubs enough to be worth it.

[John Kirk]

My averages on #14 and #15 were:

#14 - 5.03
#15 - 4.91

I prefer the back nine at Kingsley by a significant margin over the front nine, a preference that appears counter to the prevailing wisdom.  It is longer and less severe.  I never liked the changes made to the 17th hole, especially the lengthening of the hole, which made the tee shot for a 240-250 hitter very tight, and impossible to reach even the top of the hill.

Over 35 rounds I averaged 78.74 strokes.  I was playing quite well during that time.

#2 is really tough for a less talented player.  The short game around the green is very demanding.  Its relatively slope must be very high.

[JC Jones]

Thank God we have another Kingsley thread.  It's been weeks and weeks!

Don't you have a home?

[Jim Nugent]

Average score on the 2013 PGA tour for par 3s was 3.08.  So would #2 play easier than the average par 3 did last year?  I assume the PGA Tour would set up the course and hole harder than you guys see in everyday play.

Re John Kirk's numbers: statisticians can correct me, but I doubt there's statistical significance between his 3 highest-scoring holes. 

[John Kirk]

With only 35 rounds, I'm not sure the difference between all five scores is probably not significant enough to make any conclusions, except to maybe suggest that the five holes are similar in difficulty.  No hole is significantly harder or easier than the others.  Before looking at the stats, I would have guessed #11 was the easiest, and that #16 was the toughest.

Also, you can see that Tim Bert's experience was considerably different.  In general, I am a good short iron player, which may be why my scores on #2 and #9 are about the same as the others.

[Jud_T]

It'd be interesting to see the median scores rather than the average for 2 & 9 as one can get very large numbers on either hole if you miss in the wrong spot, get greedy and/or don't execute, which can significantly affect the mean.