[Will Lozier]

If scoring were limited to number of strokes, with no reference to par in terms of individual holes or for a round, this conversation is mute. Who can go round in the fewest strokes?


Cheers

[JESII]

I wonder...


The same people bothered by the TV guys shooting 25 under would be bothered by them shooting 61, 62 and 63 like it’s their job.


I’d love to find a few people that just don’t care.

[Peter Pallotta]

Just an aside - looking at that stats from the tour this year, for non major-type courses. What’s striking isn’t that the guys averaging 285-290 off the tee can hit 75-85% of the fairways; what’s striking is that the guys averaging 310-315 can too!
It seems like I just blinked and suddenly *everyone* has become Greg Norman!
I might’ve once thought ‘oh, imagine if you could combine Jack’s length with Lee‘s accuracy, what an unbeatably great driver you’d be!’ Well, I blinked again and the fantasy had become a reality, and the rare is now just the commonplace, and the exception is now the norm.
But maybe it *isn’t* the ball and driver technology that’s the cause of all this. Maybe the truth is that just about everyone on tour these days *is* Greg Norman! Maybe *everyone* is ‘great’ in the modern era.
If so, -25s are just what I should expecting, just about every week of the year.

[JESII]

Pretty fascinating back nine today...maybe because that’s all I saw this week, but a course that can help create what happened deserves credit for the job of hosting the TV guys.


Even at 25 under...

[jeffwarne]

I wonder...


The same people bothered by the TV guys shooting 25 under would be bothered by them shooting 61, 62 and 63 like it’s their job.


I’d love to find a few people that just don’t care.

I'm not bothered by it. I frankly don't think these guys get the credit they deserve for having greater skill sets than ever before in terms of distance, iron play, short game and putting.(due to athletic selection from a larger pool, athletic training, improved  technique and of course technology)
The "problem" is a PGA Tour 61 no longer gets my attention.
I still remember Ron Streck shooting 125 in the final two rounds of the Texas Open(it was that unusual)
I simply think all of the above has put the game out of scale, and of course that is punctuated by 60 year olds who hit it as far as they did at 20-and faceless 20 somethings who fly it 300 with zero skill at flighting an 80 yard shot.
The scale seems to fly in the face of sustainability of precious resources, including time-especially with the knee jerk reactions to the scale and the scores.
I also think comparisons to different eras would be easier with a slower equipment progression, which would slow the bastardization/lengthening of more classic courses, as well as making golf more entertaining (for me) to watch due to a wider variety of shots, strategy and shotmaking.
Not a whole lot happened in equipment from 1940-1990.


But that's just me-and that doesn't mean I'm not excited to watch Bryson at ANGC
Absolutely crushed at not beng able to attend though....

[JESII]

Jeff,


When I say "I'd like to find a few people who don't care", I'm referring to the people in a position to spend millions of dollars chasing the defense of par in the event the TV guys show up at their course. I'd love those people to have the conviction to decide it just doesn't matter if Tiger hits 3 drivers per round and still shoot 61 because 99+% of people do get a full challenge on their course.


My position on a roll back is that if they're going to do it, they need to do it bigly...ha!


A 10% roll back will not perform it's expected duty for more than 5 years.  The incentive the top guys have to find yardage is so great that if we roll Rory back from 320 to 290, he will find those 30 yards quite quickly. They all will, while you and I will not.


I am not a fan or bifurcation, but do believe Mike Clayton's prediction that if the Tour guys are rolled back, top amateurs will roll themselves back...and if top amateurs roll themselves back, the next level will as well...and on and on resulting in a defacto roll back across the board. BUT...once the Tour guys have found that 10% again, the rest of us are left at 90%.


So...why not prepare our courses for sustainability and interest and let rest take care of itself?

[Tim Gavrich]

It's easy to cling to course length as the main determining factor of whether or not the world's best golfers would shoot appallingly low scores on X hypothetical golf course. After all, the length of a given course is more or less wholly in control of those who are setting it up for an event.


I'd argue that wind speeds and green firmness are far bigger determinants of scoring than raw course length. Justin Thomas shot -25 at Medinah last year when it played, what, 7,600 yards? Two years earlier, Jordan Spieth and Daniel Berger played off at Hartford at -12. Yes, TPC River Highlands is a two-par-5 par-70, but in raw score the 268 required for that playoff was eclipsed by five by Thomas at Medinah. 800 yard shorter golf course, but five shots harder over 72 holes.


Course yardage is the sum of 18 inputs that can vary so greatly as to render the final total misleading at best, useless at worst. The real elements of challenge in a course are not so easily quantifiable.

[JESII]

Tim - I think the features that make Hartford interesting are recognized but not utilized. Agree 100% on wind and firm but more than anything I think week in and week out the Tour courses are set up for bombing and gauging.


Fairways firmer than greens, pins may be close to edges but generally flat areas, pristine and uniform bunker prep etc...all this goes to let guys go full offense.

[Ben Hollerbach]

But maybe it *isn’t* the ball and driver technology that’s the cause of all this. Maybe the truth is that just about everyone on tour these days *is* Greg Norman! Maybe *everyone* is ‘great’ in the modern era.
If so, -25s are just what I should expecting, just about every week of the year.

Peter,

Is your hypothesis that if you gave the players of today Greg's M43 driver and a wound balata ball they would still drive the ball like Greg did?

It's easy to cling to course length as the main determining factor of whether or not the world's best golfers would shoot appallingly low scores on X hypothetical golf course. After all, the length of a given course is more or less wholly in control of those who are setting it up for an event.

Tim,

I don't disagree that length is just one of many variables that can impact scoring. But what we're experiencing today is a shown believe that knee high rough and rock hard greens are not enough when length is at an extreme. My thought exercise is not so much focused on the exact yardage number but rather how the PGA Tour courses currently combat distance within their catalog of holes. Using the shortest holes that still keep scoring near or over par as a benchmark could show us some common trends that could be executed on a wider scale.

[David Ober]

But maybe it *isn’t* the ball and driver technology that’s the cause of all this. Maybe the truth is that just about everyone on tour these days *is* Greg Norman! Maybe *everyone* is ‘great’ in the modern era.
If so, -25s are just what I should expecting, just about every week of the year.

Peter,

Is your hypothesis that if you gave the players of today Greg's M43 driver and a wound balata ball they would still drive the ball like Greg did?

I won't speak for Peter, but my answer is that at least 20 to 30 of them would.

[JESII]

I’m 99% sure Peter’s tongue was firmly in cheek...

[David Ober]

I feel badly that this thing got pinned, and now no one is posting ....


So ....


6400 yards? Harumph! Murmur!!!

[Ben Hollerbach]

Torrey Pines South is the longest course on tour at 7765. Pebble Beach is the shortest courses tour at 6816, a difference of 949 yards. Both seaside courses, both par 72’s, and both had a stroke average of 72.5 this year. Are the small greens at pebble enough to make up a 949 yard deficit? That’s a 5 club difference on every hole!

[JESII]

Small BUMPY greens


Probably weather, although I don’t remember this year’s


6 hour rounds with the amateurs.




Also, did you separate out Pebble from the other two, and Torrey South from the North to get that 72.5?

[Ben Hollerbach]

The weather was pretty similar for both event, with Torrey being between 62*-69* and 8-14 mph wind and Pebble between 56*-67* and 7-23 mph winds (Thur-Sat were 7-14mph)


The specific courses were separated out from the tournament statistics. Looking back the previous 3 years, the yardage and scoring breakdown looks as follows:


Torrey Pines South

• 2018: 7698 / 72.83
• 2019: 7698 / 71.74
• 2020: 7698 / 72.56

Pebble Beach

• 2018: 6816 / 72.02
• 2019: 6816 / 72.43
• 2019* 7059 / 72.35 (US Open)
• 2020: 6816 / 72.52

Over the past 3 events at Torrey Pines the scoring average is 72.38, while Pebble's is 72.32. If you add in the US Open Pebble's average is 72.33.


So the key to defending Pebble is the bumpiness of the greens? Seems pretty easy to think that poor greenkeeping is the key to controlling score.

[JESII]

Ha...don't forget 6 hours with Ray Romano...

[Ben Hollerbach]

You really believe the existence of the am's and the pace of play will have a significant impact on scoring? I'd think it would be the opposite, their playing in the tournament would seemingly force the course setup to lean on the easier side, allowing for lower scores from the pro's.

With similar geography, similar weather, and similar calendar locations; I would believe that the biggest factors that allow Pebble to play as difficult as Torrey is the size of the greens and the number of holes that take driver out of the players hands.


Average hole proximity for a GIR is 36' with a GIR rate of 66.30%. At Pebble beach, on how many holes would 36' be off of the green?

[JESII]

That was mostly in jest. You’re likely correct that the course set up the first three days would be pretty tame but the amateur component has to hurt a little.


I suspect the 5-8 footers at Pebble have a significantly lower make percentage.


I suspect the field at Torrey is better (higher ranked).

[Michael Felton]

I suspect the field at Torrey is better (higher ranked).

I was thinking the same - a simple check would be to see how many OWGR points the winner of each event receives.

[David Ober]

Torrey Pines South is the longest course on tour at 7765. Pebble Beach is the shortest courses tour at 6816, a difference of 949 yards. Both seaside courses, both par 72’s, and both had a stroke average of 72.5 this year. Are the small greens at pebble enough to make up a 949 yard deficit? That’s a 5 club difference on every hole!

They never (that I have seen) play Torrey even close to its full length for the normal Tour event there. They usually play it at about 7300 to 7400. I've been there half a dozen times over the years, and I have never seen it even close to the full yardage when I've gone. Pebble, on the other hand, is routinely played near its full length from what I have seen (with minor adjustments here and there).

[Ben Hollerbach]

The field at Torrey is traditionally better, but I'm not sure how much.


Using OWGR Strength Of Field values:


2018: TPS 385, PB 392
2019: TPS 479, PB 277, PBUSO 838
2020: TPS 398, PB 227


I don't really have any idea to translate those values into on course performance. Does anyone know how these measurements work? was the US Open field in 2019 3 times better than the regular PB Field?


Data Golf has a strength of field measurement that looks at how many strokes better the field of an event may be than the average event

EVENT                                       AVERAGE     TOP 25%     25%-50%     50%-75%     Bottom 25%
2018 Farmers Insurance Open        -0.0              1.0                0.2                 -0.3                -1.1
2018 AT&T Pebble Beach Pro-Am    -0.1              1.0                0.0                 -0.4                -1.2
2019 Farmers Insurance Open         0.1              1.1                0.3                 -0.2                -0.9
2019 AT&T Pebble Beach Pro-Am    -0.1              0.9                0.1                 -0.3                -1.2
2019 U.S. Open                                   -0.1              1.3                0.5                 -0.4                -1.8
2020 Farmers Insurance Open        -0.1              1.0                0.1                 -0.3                -1.3
2020 AT&T Pebble Beach Pro-Am   -0.3              0.6               -0.0                 -0.4                -1.5

The Data Golf metric summarizes the distribution of player skill in each field. These values are expressed in units of strokes better (+) or worse (-) per round than the average PGA Tour field. 'AVERAGE' is the average skill, 'TOP 25%' is the average skill of the top 25% of the field, and the remaining columns are defined analogously (according to the column header).


This still shows that the Farmers get the better field, but the difference appears someone negligible.

So, what can be taken from this? Is the field quality is great enough to justify the scoring similarities? It doesn't appear so.

[Ben Hollerbach]

Torrey Pines South is the longest course on tour at 7765. Pebble Beach is the shortest courses tour at 6816, a difference of 949 yards. Both seaside courses, both par 72’s, and both had a stroke average of 72.5 this year. Are the small greens at pebble enough to make up a 949 yard deficit? That’s a 5 club difference on every hole!

They never (that I have seen) play Torrey even close to its full length for the normal Tour event there. They usually play it at about 7300 to 7400. I've been there half a dozen times over the years, and I have never seen it even close to the full yardage when I've gone. Pebble, on the other hand, is routinely played near its full length from what I have seen (with minor adjustments here and there).

The listed yardages for the 4 rounds this year on Torrey Pines South were 7,660; 7,660; 7,621; and 7,517

The listed yardages for the 4 rounds this year on Pebble Beach were 6,899; 6,899; 6,895; and 6,875

Torrey Pines average: 7,615, Pebble Beach average: 6,892, difference of 723 yards. Rather than a 5 club difference per hole, it only a 4 club difference. That's still a massive difference for two courses who score the same.

[David Ober]

They do not play the listed yardages, Ben. Ever -- that I'm aware of. They move multiple holes around on each day, but the "listed yardage" stays the same for the day, whether or not they change it.

[JESII]

http://www.owgr.com/about?tabID=%7BA01A4052-F0DF-4DDE-9BE2-940A54F2CA50%7D




Based on the SoF points chart, the 2019 and 2020 TP events had about twice as many Top 200 player points allocated.

[David Ober]

Torrey Pines South is the longest course on tour at 7765. Pebble Beach is the shortest courses tour at 6816, a difference of 949 yards. Both seaside courses, both par 72’s, and both had a stroke average of 72.5 this year. Are the small greens at pebble enough to make up a 949 yard deficit? That’s a 5 club difference on every hole!

They never (that I have seen) play Torrey even close to its full length for the normal Tour event there. They usually play it at about 7300 to 7400. I've been there half a dozen times over the years, and I have never seen it even close to the full yardage when I've gone. Pebble, on the other hand, is routinely played near its full length from what I have seen (with minor adjustments here and there).

The listed yardages for the 4 rounds this year on Torrey Pines South were 7,660; 7,660; 7,621; and 7,517

The listed yardages for the 4 rounds this year on Pebble Beach were 6,899; 6,899; 6,895; and 6,875

Torrey Pines average: 7,615, Pebble Beach average: 6,892, difference of 723 yards. Rather than a 5 club difference per hole, it only a 4 club difference. That's still a massive difference for two courses who score the same.

For an understanding of what actually happens at a Tour event regarding yardages, this is a good article:


https://golfweek.usatoday.com/2002/02/26/usga-shortens-torreys-14th-for-open/

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()