The Gap...................

[Bob_Huntley]

What is it about tournament play that reduces scratch players to mere hackers? I am reading the first round qualifying scores of the California State Amateur Championship, being held at Pebble Beach and Spanish Bay.

Three players broke par, with nearly forty percent of the field shooting 80 or more. The defending champion had a quick 83 at Spanish Bay.

When comparing an awfully good amateur player to a touring pro, the gap in performance is truly amazing

[BCrosby]

I agree.  The gap is huge.

Over the last couple of years I've played with some Buy.com players and someone who was off and on the PGA Tour for about 15 years.

Any of those guys would win the GA State Am by 10 or more strokes.  Even if they weren't putting well.  

Their ball striking is at another level.  You don't fully appreciate it until you play with them.  It is profoundly humbling.

Bob

[Scott_Burroughs]

Ain't it the truth, at least from the single digit handicap perspective.

About 80% of the time I play with guys from GCA, I turn into a hacker, despite no pressure and fine playing companions.

Similar things usually happen in tournaments, as well, with pressure and not always fine playing companions.

I feel the reasons I don't usually play well with other guys are:

1)  too relaxed, with mind not concentrating on game

2) unfamiliarity with course, such as when not to hit driver, where not to hit it, etc.  

3) first time playing course means "go for it" and "never lay up" on all gambling type holes, reachable par 5's with trouble lurking, etc.

4) different playing conditions such as faster and tougher greens and less forgiving areas when shots are a little off the mark.

5) I'm not as good as I think I am  

Here's my range of scores when playing with other GCAers:

75-somewhere in the 90's   , handicap usually 5-7.

I wish I cared less about score.

But it's not about score, right?  

[Dave_Miller]

At my place in Florida there are several tour pros living there.  When they are on the range hitting balls you know who it is just from the sound.  The Ball Striking is truly at another level.  
Even good single digit amateurs do not reach this level.
One very good amateur, who is nationally known for accomplishments other than golf, tried to go through a Q school and did not even come close.  Yet shooting par or a little better most days ,under club conditions, is routine.  
These guys take it to a whole different level.
As the saying goes "They are playing a game with which I am unfamiliar"

Fairways and Greens
Dave

[Matt_Ward]

Scott B:

You hit the nail ont he head when you mentioned unfamiliarity with the course. In addition, you also are playing from the tips which adds even more demands.

Look at our day together at Plainfield. You forgot your clubs at Baltusrol that morning, had to run back to get them and zipback over to Plainfield for another round.

Scott -- my dear man -- that's a lot of zipping around! No wonder it's tough to grab the clubs and shoot low.

All kidding aside -- the key difference between top amateurs and pros is the ability to recover. Watch the best players in the world and their short games are all first rate. They also are much better day-to-day putters because when you shoot 67, 68, 66 you must be able to roll the ball on the carpet.

There's also the entire aspect of course management -- good pros know how hard to push the pedal when in trouble -- they don't live in Disneyland like many amateurs and think they're going to pull an Arnie Palmer type recovery!

[TEPaul]

Tournament play and estimating the GAP between amateurs and touring pros?

I think to get any kind of accurate estimate of the gap you have to compare amateurs that play a good amount of individual stroke play tournament golf for starters.

Amateurs that just play match play, even tournaments or even better ball stroke play tournaments and have never played individual stroke play tournament golf really don't know how to do it very well. It really doesn't have much of anything to do with their ball striking being any different or better if they play individual stroke play--it's just if they haven't done it or done it very much they just don't know how to do it very well!

It can make them very nervous and uncomfortable and they tend to get all hung up on the consequences of individual shots, that often makes them panic, make dumb decisions and lose their concentration and confidence. Individual stroke play is so much more grueling than any kind of match play or even stroke play better ball! In the other forms of golf there are all kinds of little let-ups but in individual stroke play there's none--it has to be four plus hours of good concentration that isn't easy if your unfamiliar with it or even out of your element in it!

Even really good amateurs who do play stroke play can get out of their element quite easily. But it sounds like in that qualifying round Bob mentioned maybe the tournament set-up might have had something to do with unusually high scores.

Tournament tough amateurs and tour pros know how to play those kinds of set-ups so much better because they have a better sense of the risks, how to identify them and deal with them.

I was struck by what Matt Kuchar said recently in an exhibition around here on the differences of high level amateur golf or even the Buy.com tour vs the big tour. He mentioned the big difference to him wasn't in the physical or even ball striking abilities on the big tour (he actually said the ball striking ability on the Buy.com was as good and the swings actually were better) but he said that the sense of how to score on the big tour was much better.

What he meant by that is probably different than most might think. He didn't mean that the big tour players have figured out how to make more birdies--not at all--but they do know how to avoid making bogies and certainly "others" much better. You don't go far on the big tour making "others"!

But really good amateurs and tour pros don't hit the ball all that much differently--it's all in management, confidence at the level your on and a much more refined sense of the flow of an entire tournament and what it all means.

If you want to see something interesting go follow a really competitive tour pro on Thursday--you'll probably pick up some things about a refined sense of the flow of a 72 hole individual stroke play you never knew! And I don't mean just watch him go through a hole--watch him practice, go to the first tee and play the entire round--it's a bit of an education--and it's quite different than even a very good amateur!

[JSlonis]

Tom,

Excellent take on the question at hand.  I see it all the time in qualifying rounds and stroke play events, many guys that seem to always play well in the local Better Ball Invitational, more often than not, play much more poorly when their score is the only one that counts. Individual Stroke Play is a different animal altogether, by far the most difficult format(not including alternate shot).

I think the single biggest factor in the gap between top pros and top am's is that the Pro's are extremely proficient from 120 yards and in.  The short game, wedge play, chipping, pitching, putting is what separates the men from the boys. I have seen lots of guys that can really strike the ball well, but can't putt it in a Crab Basket from 5 feet.  Granted, tour players misses are usually less severe than ours, but getting the ball in the hole(short game) is the key to scoring.

If good amateur players tracked their rounds while playing well, they would hit nearly the same number of greens in reg. as many tour players, but the disparity in scores would be striking.  I'm amazed each week that I look at stats from the tour as to greens in reg. by the players and what low scores they shoot given the fact that they may only hit 10-13 greens. A tour player can hit 12 greens(which is about the average) and shoot 68-70. Your average top amateur player would shoot 74-76, given the same numbers of GIR.

[David Wigler]

Bob,

If you find the answer to your question, please tell me.  I was playing my tail off leading up to the Michigan State Am.  I was certain this was year.  Then I put the tee into the ground and choked worse than Rosie O'Donnell at an all-you-can-eat fish fry.  First round after the qualifying disaster (On a harder course from 300 yards longer) - 75.

[Mashie1]

One must be able to make the 6 - 10 footers when the collar is tight - who chokes the best wins.

Mashie1

 

[A_Clay_Man]

Bob-
Here's some more factors to the ones already presented:
Local lore:
Playing on the Peninsula has a certain spirituality to it, which like the lord, giveth and taketh away. You never what kinda day it is, until it is.

Spanish Bay especially, is the type of place that if you want to score, you better manage it properly and on every shot.  

Consistency:
 A function of focus, awareness and knowing what the specific hole holds for the conditions of the day or moment. On the Peninsula One often has to read the Fog and play it's edges, because thats where the wind is. It's June Bob, was it foggy?


That all being said.... some amateurs have what I call an ego-cap. Only turn in their low scores and have little, strict stroke play, experience. Realistically they have no business being there.

Oh yeah; brains turn to mush otherwise there'd be no Gap.

[Lou Duran]

The quality of the missed shots may account for the variance, compounded by the difference in scoring ability (course management and short game) and being under the pressure of medal play 30+ times per year.  I've been between 0-5 most of my life, yet I hit several "putrid" shots nearly every round.  While watching the USGA Mid Am at Dallas Athletic Club several years ago, I was less impressed by the good shots than I was with the absence of really bad ones.  I have played with a couple of tour pros, and again, I was not overwhelmed by their great shots.  The biggest difference by far was that their misses were often better than my good shots.  Low handicap players have gaps in their games, and tournament play heightens the uncertainty and insecurity.  Amateurs who play tournament golf regularly have a more narrow scoring range.  Those who play only occasionally can shoot anything.  My own tournament range is a pathetic 70 - 92.

[A_Clay_Man]

You never what kinda day it is, until it is.

Should read: You never know what kind of day it is until it is.

My first attempt at a yogiism, and I blow it

[TEPaul]

Jamie:

That's a very interesting figure of GIR and scoring of am vs tour player and no doubt true and accurate. It's actually surprising if a tour player doesn't get up and down, don't you think?

Shivas:

I think there are many more ams around the country that hit the ball about as good as a tour player--or let's say capabable of doing it (particularly some of these younger ones) but will probably never have a chance of making it on tour. To make it on tour anyone clearly has to have almost all facets of the game firing on all 8 cylinders but I do think the greatest reason for success or failure out there is not the physical but the confidence level. I've seen so many players over the decades who really do have the physical and shot making tools but they never seem able to figure out that level of confidence in themselves to feel OK at that lofty level.

Who wouldn't understand that though? I mean think of some young kid coming up and no matter what success he's had in college or whatever all of a sudden finding himself hitting balls next to Ernie, Phil and Tiger for a living! No matter how good you are or think you are that has to be a bit of a jolt to get used to!

But the transition into that top level has some interesting history with transitional confidence levels. How many times have you seen a really top notch player coming into the pros ranks and doing really well or winning in that transition and then having his confidence level tail off? Crenshaw, Verplank, Mickelson and a number of others!

The only two I know of who broken in with a bang and never looked back are interestingly Nicklaus and Woods! Both of them seemed to enter the tour ranks with a confidence level that sort of said; "These idols and icons aren't going to beat me" and that's the way it was. With Nicklaus it took them a little time to see he was there to stay but with Woods it was like they could truly see this coming before he even got there!

[JWalker]

His wild swings and wedges blown over the green were probably a result of trying to hard to showcase his skills. He won two events not long after turning pro. His confidence was instilled in him at a very young age. He has dominated the competition at every age group/ level he has played. Now he is just doing the same thing he has always done(dominating the competition) at the highest level. His confidence is forged with years of dominating the competition. This is not the same confidence that Rotella teaches.

[Dave_Miller]

To: TEPaul
Oh Great Doyen.  I must ask for a definition of really good amateur vs tour pro.  While I agree with Matt Kuchar's comment between the Buy.com and PGA Tour e.g Fran Quinn. I submit with some exceptions there is a significant difference between the ball striking abilities of Good Amateurs and the Tour Pro's.  My exceptions to this would be Amateurs such as James Driscoll, Kuchar, David Gossett, et al who are heading to the pro ranks as they reach the end of their Collegiate careers.  
The really good amateurs, even those who play medal, do not strike the ball with the same consistency as the pro's.  The other exception I would say is Jay Sigel.  We all know Jay's story.
I am not as familiar with the Philly and Pa players any more as I am with New England but even the great Jerry Courville is not quite in the same league with the Tour Pro's.
How would you define the guys yuou are referring to .
Thanks,
Fairways and Greens,

Dave

[Ed_Baker]

TEP:

Great minds think alike!

Up until 2 years ago there was a regular Tour stop at Pleasant Valley in Sutton Ma. I played in the Pro-AM pretty regularly over the years and only drew "name" players a couple of times. As a result I would follow "my" pro for the week, invariably an exempt player ranked 85 to 125 on that years money list, generally a guy that was struggling to keep his exempt status. A number of times we had pros and caddies stay at our house for the week so we got to see what a week on the tour was like for these guys, its damn hard work!

The "gap" on tour is much smaller than between pros and ams but a gap definately exists out there too. It mainly exists between the ears and is most easily defined as confidence.

I won't name names here but a well known journeyman pro that has had a steady if unspectacular career was staying with us his first year on tour. He was hitting the ball well that week and we even won the pro-am. He shot 5 under on thursday with an 8:30 am tee time, off of #10, and was paired with a Monday qualifier and a pro of similar money list ranking to him. My wife and I were virtually his entire gallery.Friday he gets a 1:30pm tee time ,off of #1,paired with Fred Couples and Wayne Levi. He spends most of Thursday evening worrying about the pairing, and then goes out tighter than a lug nut and scrapes it around in 3 over and barely makes the cut!

The difference in his swing, his personality, his whole demeanor, was palpable from Thursday night to Friday night. He ended up doing ok on the weekend and  won about 10 grand for the week, but I'll never forget the differences in his play and moods from one day to the next. Christ, I was exhausted going through the week with the guy, the average fan has no idea of what these guys go through each week.

The "gap" exists at all levels of golf.

[David Wigler]

Shivas,

Jack was my hero but there is one fact not in your report - Scores.  Tigers scores at Augusta, Pebble and St. Andrews are mind boggling.  Jack never got that low.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Bob,

The GAP is greater than you think.

Just before the Ryder cup I played with Rick Hartman and Jesper Parnevik.  Rick Hartman is one of the BEST pros in the Metropolitan New York area.

They are friends and were having a match, for a little $ and a lot of pride.

Rick played him even, shot for shot, and I believe won, one or two up.  After the round I told Rick that he could play at Jesper's level, and should consider trying the tour.

He told me, that when the tournament starts, Jesper was
TEN (10) shots better per round than he was.

If one looks at Rick's record in the Met Open and other tournaments you can see how much better he is than amateurs from the Met area.  There is a substantial GAP, perhaps five to ten shots per round against the best players in the area, let alone low handicapers,

So factor in those two GAPS, and perhaps you'll get a feel for how incredibly good the TOUR pros are.

[JakaB]

Shivas,

The Jack post above would make me proud to show any of my real world friends why I travel to meet this eclectic group of internet buds...

[JWalker]

Shivas,
   Let's make things clear, to date Jack is the greatest champion the game has ever seen.Your argument for Jack about the competition he faced is more than likely going to be the hottest topic in golf sometime over the next 6-10 years(your a little early) barring injury, tragedy, blah, blah, blah. True, Tiger's competition does not currently have the mental make-up of a Palmer, Player, Trevino, Miller, Casper, Floyd. IMO that bunch of pussies:Mickelson,Els, Singh, Duval, and Garcia would have waxed the other players you named. I agree we are experiencing a Tigerized media so we must find a way to sift through it. What would be the be the best way to compare these two great champions? Their score on the same golf courses compared to the median of the field. No! The fields are much tougher today! Maybe we should compare the shots in their bag. Although I have never heard Jack say this, some of the other Pros from from Jack's era say their games were similar until they got around the greens with the edge going to Tiger. Are there better ways to compare these two or is it simply not possible?

[Bob_Huntley]

California Stroke Play Qualifying.

The medallist shoots 146, the highest ever. The 32nd man in the 32 man field for match play shoots 153, nine over.

Those failing to qualify shot between 10 and 31 over par. The conditions were benign. I daresay some our better collegiate players were not playing, but it sure doesn't say much for the quality of California amateur golf.

[johnk]

Shivas,

People tend to forget greatness over time.  Jack's record was really incredible.  Nobody thought they'd ever see it again.  And I agree that he gets really hot from in '71 and '72, so we'll see how Tiger keeps up.

I think the scoring average difference actually stems from a tendency Jack talks about in his books (See "My Story" - where he covers all his major victories) - scrape it around on Thursday and Friday, and then pour it on during the weekend.  Jack basically conserved energy, made the cut somewhere near the lead, then decided to win.  That's one reason why his cumulative score over those first 22 majors is something like +40 and Tiger's is around -80.  I think it's also why Jack has so many seconds. He left himself too much work on many occasions.

Overall, Tiger is a more complete player who does totally dominate his competition.  There's a lot more money and talent in golf today, and to dominate today is very impressive.  Worth the fawning attention he's getting...

  

[JakaB]

johnk,

Nice intitals btw...I have said it before and here goes again...the money in the game has decreased the talent not increased it.  Much like the NBA players are able to achieve flashy talent without the ability to close the deal and still become very rich and relax...Tiger at what expense we have yet to see has ambition that has been the demize of most great men with a similar curse..while the vagilites simply live off his leftovers with big families and a happy life.  By the time these guys start to learn to win they are too rich to bleed the extra drop the champions of old used to spill just to make entry fees.    

[David Wigler]

Shivas,

You give Sergio too much credit.  He went +2 over the last five holes at Medinah (Once he got close to Tiger).  If Tiger doesn't play the back nine +4, it is no contest.  Hardly a Watsonesq charge.

[Scott_Burroughs]

Aha!  Shivas goes and backs up all his claims with pure facts, then goes and talks about Duval's 59 in Vegas.  It was at the Bob Hope at the Palmer Private course at PGA West in La Quinta, CA!  

Sorry, Shivas, just had to bust your chops!