Cage Match to the DEATH: LPGA Tour vs. Middle-aged Scratch and Below

[Obee]

I looked at last year's results for this Amateur event. Out of 100 teams shown in the results for the event, 1 team withdrew and 99 finished. Looking only at the Sunday gross scores i.e. the so called "real golf" the field in the aggregate took an average of 88.60 strokes per player. OK, so some of them are not scratch players. The OP stated 40 or so scratch. This isn't apples to apples since I can only see team scores, but ...

 

7 two player groups scored 190 or higher. Those groups averaged 95.78 strokes per player.

12 two player groups scored between 180 to 189. Those groups averaged 91.71 strokes per player.

34 two player groups scored between 170 to 179. Those groups averaged 87.56 strokes per player.

23 two player groups scored between 160 and 169. Those groups averaged 82.17 strokes per player.

18 two player groups scored between 150 and 159. Those groups averaged 77.50 strokes per player.

Only 5 two player groups scored under 150. Those 5 groups averaged 73.9 strokes per player. Their average team score was 147.8.

 

The low 40 gross team scores on Sunday scored an aggregate gross of 6,303 strokes on Sunday for an average team score of 157.58 or average player score of 78.79 strokes.

 

http://www.wilshirec...017 REVISED.pdf

 

Here's some more for you. I have the full bore Acrobat Pro, so I can export that into a spreadsheet and play around with it. What I did was sort by handicap. There were 12 groups (24 golfers) with + handicaps, and three groups (6 golfers) listed as exactly scratch. The total of the pluses was +36, so I went the other way to get as close to -36 as I could. To do that I went in order and added in one 1, three 2s, five 4s, and two 5s, for a total of -37. So that's 26 groups (52 golfers), 12 (24) better than scratch, three (6) at scratch, and 11 (22) worse than scratch, combined to average out as close as I could get to scratch.

 

For those 26 groups their average two round total was 158, so 79 per round.

 

If you're nervous about including the 4s and 5s and thinking that they're throwing it off, here's another way to approach it, though with your standard small sample size warning applying.

 

Scratches only (n=3 groups) ... 159 / 79.5

+1 to 1 (n=6) ... 158 / 79

+2 to 2 (n=12) ... 156 / 78

 

Fairly consistent results either way.

 

Like I said several pages ago, IMO the very best few guys in Obee's field might be able to beat the best in an LPGA field on any given day.....but as an entire field or as a multi day affair, the average scratch man has zero chance against LPGA tour players.

 

I'm curious to see what actually happens on Memorial day, but I'd be happy to bet the results will be something quite similar to the above.

 

I said "scratch and below," and they use LI, not current or average.

 

Also, keep in mind that a team could be listed as +1, but actually be a +2 and a 1. But those are both LI. So the 1, would NOT be a guy we are ever talkng about in these debates, because his AVERAGE index was probably at least 2, and possibly pushing 3.

 

The +2 might very well be the proverbial "true scratch" we are looking for in fact. (Perhaps an LI +1.8, but an average index for the year of 0.1 or thereabouts).

 

Just clarifying terms, friends. I have always been very clear that when I am talking about a scratch player it is someone who averages approximately a scratch index over an entire year (let's call it an average index of of +0.5 to 0.5 to get our terms straight).

 

Anything lower than that is a plus handicapper, and anything higher than that is not a scratch golfer.

[Argonne69]

Also, remove 1 full stroke for the extra length we play, and keep in mind that ALL handicaps listed are combined of the team, and are LI (low index) of the entire year.

 

:-)

 

To give an example: 1 hole alone on Sunday (a long 550(?) yard par 5 with a cross-hazard in front of the green, which makes it a 3-shot hole for 95% of scratch ams, if playing wisely) was more than a 100 yard difference. I think the ladies played it at 420ish, as they were 150 to 170 in on their second shots.

 

We will play (virtually) every hole longer than the ladies. I will re-watch Sunday's coverage to get a better idea of the tees they played versus where we play, and will document to the best of my ability. We can make an appropriate yardage adjustment if we want to have as solid data as possible.

 

 

One full stroke? At most the women played it 200 yards shorter than the tips, which would be half a stroke at most. Their layout for the first two rounds was 6,450 yards. On the weekends they generally move up the tees on a par 5, and possibly a par 3. The course has a 1.1 rating difference between the 6265 yard whites and the 6506 yards blues.

[Obee]

Also, remove 1 full stroke for the extra length we play, and keep in mind that ALL handicaps listed are combined of the team, and are LI (low index) of the entire year.

 

:-)

 

To give an example: 1 hole alone on Sunday (a long 550(?) yard par 5 with a cross-hazard in front of the green, which makes it a 3-shot hole for 95% of scratch ams, if playing wisely) was more than a 100 yard difference. I think the ladies played it at 420ish, as they were 150 to 170 in on their second shots.

 

We will play (virtually) every hole longer than the ladies. I will re-watch Sunday's coverage to get a better idea of the tees they played versus where we play, and will document to the best of my ability. We can make an appropriate yardage adjustment if we want to have as solid data as possible.

 

 

One full stroke? At most the women played it 200 yards shorter than the tips, which would be half a stroke at most. Their layout for the first two rounds was 6,450 yards. On the weekends they generally move up the tees on a par 5, and possibly a par 3. The course has a 1.1 rating difference between the 6265 yard whites and the 6506 yards blues.

 

My bad, my home course has a 2-stroke difference per 400 yards. That's what I used as a comparison. We will play the course 200 yards, total, longer, on average, I am told. There are a couple tees we will likely play that are not on the card.

 

I will let everyone know where the tees are.

[jmck]

Here are 2016 results done the same way. (http://www.wilshirecountryclub.com/documents/10184/16289/FinalResultbyGross2016.pdf). There were eight teams (16 players) with a plus handicap, and 2 teams listed as exactly scratch. The cumulative positive handicaps of the pluses was 20. To get -20 going in the other direction you add in 2 ones, 3 twos, and 4 threes. That's exactly -20, and it's 38 golfers, darn close to your original estimate of 40. 8 teams at plus, 2 teams at scratch, and 9 teams at 1-3 handicaps.

 

So, for 38 golfers, averaging a scratch handicap, the two round gross total was 154, or 77.

 

Obee, they don't list it down to the decimal, so I can't do +0.5 to 0.5. To get it as close to scratch as possible, again keeping in mind these sample sizes get small:

 

Scratch only (n=2 groups) ... 158 / 79

+1 to 1 (n=6) ... 151 / 75.5

+2 to 2 (n=10) ... 153 / 76.5

 

So in less windy conditions it looks like your group is maybe a shot or two better in '16 than '17. Tough to put an exact number on it given the small sample sizes, but still lagging behind an LPGA field, even if you adjust it down another shot for distance.

 

Incidentally I ran the numbers for only scratch or better:

 

2017: (n=16 groups) ... 154 / 77

2016: (n=10) ... 153 / 76.5

 

Not all that much better than the larger scratch-averaging groups.

[WidespreadPanic]

I recently shot a 76 at Old American (where LPGA is playing) so lets see how many I would have beat. It's a windy course, but it wasn't blowing like it is right now.

 

*i don't think this is an equal comparison. Conditions, tournament pressure, etc. Its a really cool course that I suggest playing if you're ever in the Dallas area.

[cardoustie]

i think a true tourney +2 or +3 could compete past the middle of the pack in the LPGA tour. This is a male player that hits it 280 comfortably like Lexi

 

I have a good friend that is a true TOURNEY +3 and he'd be close to winning 4 day events I feel.

 

He shot 65 yesterday before his Hall of Fame induction ceremony. Was just runner up in the Haskins 4 Ball. Has played 2 US Senior Opens and two PGA tour events

 

An avg. country club scratch (0.0) that popcorns it 250 would get lambasted. When I was a college tourney +0.4 years back, I'd get roasted by the LPGA players. I know it, and Korda knows it, heck the American people know it. Today's 4 handicap would be emasculated .. , I know I would be. I've played Mission Hills right before their major and I see what the ladies shoot there during the Dinah and colour me impressed !

 

I think the argument is defining the actual level of the scratch player. A group of a good cross section of scratches is going to fun to see Obee.

[Sean2]

I wonder if this thread will prompt someone to go through the transgender thing so they can play on the LPGA Tour? :-)

[Argonne69]

I wonder if this thread will prompt someone to go through the transgender thing so they can play on the LPGA Tour? :-)

 

Lol. Wouldn't it be easier for a middle aged scratch male golfer to petition the tour to let them play based on the data presented that shows (or doesn't) show that they could play at least as good as the 78th ranked player? Obviously the hardest part would be agreeing on the definition of "scratch".

[Dpavs]

I wonder if this thread will prompt someone to go through the transgender thing so they can play on the LPGA Tour? :-)

 

Lol. Wouldn't it be easier for a middle aged scratch male golfer to petition the tour to let them play based on the data presented that shows (or doesn't) show that they could play at least as good as the 78th ranked player? Obviously the hardest part would be agreeing on the definition of "scratch".

 

Lol.. I was thinking the same as doing it that way would require far less "equipment" changes. :taunt:

[smeech8000]

I wonder if this thread will prompt someone to go through the transgender thing so they can play on the LPGA Tour? :-)

 

Lol. Wouldn't it be easier for a middle aged scratch male golfer to petition the tour to let them play based on the data presented that shows (or doesn't) show that they could play at least as good as the 78th ranked player? Obviously the hardest part would be agreeing on the definition of "scratch".

 

Lol.. I was thinking the same as doing it that way would require far less "equipment" changes. :taunt:

 

Try as you may, there's still no getting around that pesky one-ball rule...

[cardoustie]

I wonder if this thread will prompt someone to go through the transgender thing so they can play on the LPGA Tour? :-)

 

Lol. Wouldn't it be easier for a middle aged scratch male golfer to petition the tour to let them play based on the data presented that shows (or doesn't) show that they could play at least as good as the 78th ranked player? Obviously the hardest part would be agreeing on the definition of "scratch".

 

It's happened in professional volleyball in Brazil. Guy converts to girl .. top player ....

[DavePelz4]

Renee RIchards did it in women's tennis.

[stormbringer]

I will take the ladies by a LARGE margin don't care about the course length much either. Not even close fellas and I have played at scratch and I have played with some (though few) LPGA, PGA, Web.Com and Senior PGA players. I don't think you know just how consistent they are. Several of the ladies don't give up much if any distance to the average scratch guy anymore. Distance is highly overrated in this comparison. I would put my money on any LPGA player hitting her 5 hybrid over the typical scratch hitting his 7 iron.

 

Average club head speed is now 95mph on the LPGA tour. They hit many more greens then a scratch player, out putt them, out chip them, etc.

 

Let's put some real pressure on the scratch players. Camera's, gallery, playing for your livelihood.

 

They would get smoked!

[drewtaylor21]

I will take the ladies by a LARGE margin don't care about the course length much either. Not even close fellas and I have played at scratch and I have played with LPGA, PGA, Web.Com and Senior PGA players.

 

You will get smoked!

 

It's always amusing to me when guys throw in their opinion based on the thread title without bothering to read the previous 6 pages.... :rofl:

[stormbringer]

I will take the ladies by a LARGE margin don't care about the course length much either. Not even close fellas and I have played at scratch and I have played with LPGA, PGA, Web.Com and Senior PGA players.

 

You will get smoked!

 

It's always amusing to me when guys throw in their opinion based on the thread title without bothering to read the previous 6 pages.... :rofl:

 

I have read the above post's. Just think it funny that "Average Joes" want to compare themselves to elite professionals.

 

I will take the ladies every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

[deadsolid...shank]

I will take the ladies by a LARGE margin don't care about the course length much either. Not even close fellas and I have played at scratch and I have played with LPGA, PGA, Web.Com and Senior PGA players.

 

You will get smoked!

 

It's always amusing to me when guys throw in their opinion based on the thread title without bothering to read the previous 6 pages.... :rofl:

 

I have read the above post's. Just think it funny that "Average Joes" want to compare themselves to elite professionals.

 

I will take the ladies every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

 

Scratch is far away from being an "average Joe".

[DavePelz4]

I will take the ladies by a LARGE margin don't care about the course length much either. Not even close fellas and I have played at scratch and I have played with LPGA, PGA, Web.Com and Senior PGA players.

 

You will get smoked!

 

It's always amusing to me when guys throw in their opinion based on the thread title without bothering to read the previous 6 pages.... :rofl:

 

I have read the above post's. Just think it funny that "Average Joes" want to compare themselves to elite professionals.

 

I will take the ladies every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

 

People are looking at the top of the leaderboard...here's part of the bottom of the leaderboard from 2 weeks ago:

 

CUT Paula Creamer 72 - 77 149

 

CUT Kassidy Teare 72 - 77 149

 

CUT Kelly Shon 71 - 78 149

 

CUT Marina Alex 76 - 74 150

 

CUT Joanna Klatten 75 - 75 150

 

CUT Yani Tseng 75 - 75 150

 

CUT Chella Choi 74 - 76 150

 

CUT Lindsey Weaver 74 - 76 150

 

 

CUT Min Lee 73 - 77 150

 

 

CUT Sarah Jane Smith 78 - 73 151

 

CUT Erynne Lee 77 - 74 151

 

CUT Sherman Santiwiwatthanaphong 77 - 74 151

 

CUT Kris Tamulis 76 - 75 151

 

 

CUT Megan Khang 75 - 76 151

 

 

CUT Robynn Ree 75 - 76 151

 

CUT Mel Reid 75 - 76 151

 

 

CUT Thidapa Suwannapura 75 - 76 151

 

 

CUT Cindy LaCrosse 74 - 77 151

 

CUT Katherine Perry 74 - 77 151

 

 

CUT Pernilla Lindberg 79 - 73 152

 

 

CUT Mina Harigae 78 - 74 152

 

CUT Morgan Pressel 78 - 74 152

 

 

CUT Brianna Do 77 - 75 152

 

CUT Maude-Aimee Leblanc 77 - 75 152

 

 

CUT Brittany Lang 76 - 76 152

 

 

CUT Benyapa Niphatsophon 78 - 75 153

 

 

CUT Mi Jung Hur 77 - 76 153

 

CUT Christina Kim 77 - 76 153

 

CUT Paula Reto 75 - 78 153

 

CUT Nicole Broch Larsen 79 - 75 154

 

CUT Simin Feng 76 - 78 154

 

CUT Lee Lopez 81 - 75 156

 

 

CUT Becky Morgan 79 - 77 156

 

 

CUT Jackie Stoelting 78 - 78 156

 

 

CUT Nannette Hill 75 - 81 156

 

 

CUT Yuting Shi 79 - 78 157

 

 

CUT Anne-Catherine Tanguay 77 - 81 158

 

 

CUT Ji Eun Kim 78 - 81 159

 

Do you really think that a true scratch or plus handicap doesn't have a chance of shooting 75-81?

[rawdog]

Ah, yes, the transgender "thing." I hope I do not get disciplined for this, but I have a higher respect for you guys and these kinds of jokes are a bit beneath you all.

 

Transgender people have been targeted and brutally murdered for being who they are. Calling transitioning a "thing" is a bit disingenuous. And I consider myself pretty conservative.

 

Good thread, carry on.

[Need4spd]

This seems disrespectful to LPGA players. I am a middle aged (35) scratch golfer and I’m absolutely positive I would get my Word not allowed handed to me by an LPGA tour player. I happen to play the same course here in Phoenix they played a couple months ago on a semi regular basis. Granted, I play it from the tips, but they absolutely tear that place apart and I’ve never broken par there that I can recall. I wouldn’t want any part of that match.

[Shilgy]

I will take the ladies by a LARGE margin don't care about the course length much either. Not even close fellas and I have played at scratch and I have played with LPGA, PGA, Web.Com and Senior PGA players.

 

You will get smoked!

 

It's always amusing to me when guys throw in their opinion based on the thread title without bothering to read the previous 6 pages.... :rofl:

 

I have read the above post's. Just think it funny that "Average Joes" want to compare themselves to elite professionals.

 

I will take the ladies every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

 

People are looking at the top of the leaderboard...here's part of the bottom of the leaderboard from 2 weeks ago:

 

CUT Paula Creamer 72 - 77 149

 

CUT Kassidy Teare 72 - 77 149

 

CUT Kelly Shon 71 - 78 149

 

CUT Marina Alex 76 - 74 150

 

CUT Joanna Klatten 75 - 75 150

 

CUT Yani Tseng 75 - 75 150

 

CUT Chella Choi 74 - 76 150

 

CUT Lindsey Weaver 74 - 76 150

 

 

CUT Min Lee 73 - 77 150

 

 

CUT Sarah Jane Smith 78 - 73 151

 

CUT Erynne Lee 77 - 74 151

 

CUT Sherman Santiwiwatthanaphong 77 - 74 151

 

CUT Kris Tamulis 76 - 75 151

 

 

CUT Megan Khang 75 - 76 151

 

 

CUT Robynn Ree 75 - 76 151

 

CUT Mel Reid 75 - 76 151

 

 

CUT Thidapa Suwannapura 75 - 76 151

 

 

CUT Cindy LaCrosse 74 - 77 151

 

CUT Katherine Perry 74 - 77 151

 

 

CUT Pernilla Lindberg 79 - 73 152

 

 

CUT Mina Harigae 78 - 74 152

 

CUT Morgan Pressel 78 - 74 152

 

 

CUT Brianna Do 77 - 75 152

 

CUT Maude-Aimee Leblanc 77 - 75 152

 

 

CUT Brittany Lang 76 - 76 152

 

 

CUT Benyapa Niphatsophon 78 - 75 153

 

 

CUT Mi Jung Hur 77 - 76 153

 

CUT Christina Kim 77 - 76 153

 

CUT Paula Reto 75 - 78 153

 

CUT Nicole Broch Larsen 79 - 75 154

 

CUT Simin Feng 76 - 78 154

 

CUT Lee Lopez 81 - 75 156

 

 

CUT Becky Morgan 79 - 77 156

 

 

CUT Jackie Stoelting 78 - 78 156

 

 

CUT Nannette Hill 75 - 81 156

 

 

CUT Yuting Shi 79 - 78 157

 

 

CUT Anne-Catherine Tanguay 77 - 81 158

 

 

CUT Ji Eun Kim 78 - 81 159

 

Do you really think that a true scratch or plus handicap doesn't have a chance of shooting 75-81?

Sure, he might shoot 75-75 and miss the cut. Pernilla Lindbergh is on your list at 79-73. Would the scratch have won at the ANA shooting 65-67-70-71? Seems highly unlikely doesn't it? Marina Alex is on your list at 76-74. 10 of her last 26 rounds are in the 60's and she's averaging 71.09 this year on tour. I'm sure your average scratch could do that if he was really about a +3.

 

Handicaps are an interesting thing. We hear "scratch" and think that means the player averages about par. In reality he will average about 3 over the course rating and only even shoot the rating about 1 time in 4. So yes, he could perhaps make a very rare occasional cut.

[Need4spd]

I will take the ladies by a LARGE margin don't care about the course length much either. Not even close fellas and I have played at scratch and I have played with LPGA, PGA, Web.Com and Senior PGA players.

 

You will get smoked!

 

It's always amusing to me when guys throw in their opinion based on the thread title without bothering to read the previous 6 pages.... :rofl:

 

I have read the above post's. Just think it funny that "Average Joes" want to compare themselves to elite professionals.

 

I will take the ladies every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

 

People are looking at the top of the leaderboard...here's part of the bottom of the leaderboard from 2 weeks ago:

 

CUT Paula Creamer 72 - 77 149

 

CUT Kassidy Teare 72 - 77 149

 

CUT Kelly Shon 71 - 78 149

 

CUT Marina Alex 76 - 74 150

 

CUT Joanna Klatten 75 - 75 150

 

CUT Yani Tseng 75 - 75 150

 

CUT Chella Choi 74 - 76 150

 

CUT Lindsey Weaver 74 - 76 150

 

 

CUT Min Lee 73 - 77 150

 

 

CUT Sarah Jane Smith 78 - 73 151

 

CUT Erynne Lee 77 - 74 151

 

CUT Sherman Santiwiwatthanaphong 77 - 74 151

 

CUT Kris Tamulis 76 - 75 151

 

 

CUT Megan Khang 75 - 76 151

 

 

CUT Robynn Ree 75 - 76 151

 

CUT Mel Reid 75 - 76 151

 

 

CUT Thidapa Suwannapura 75 - 76 151

 

 

CUT Cindy LaCrosse 74 - 77 151

 

CUT Katherine Perry 74 - 77 151

 

 

CUT Pernilla Lindberg 79 - 73 152

 

 

CUT Mina Harigae 78 - 74 152

 

CUT Morgan Pressel 78 - 74 152

 

 

CUT Brianna Do 77 - 75 152

 

CUT Maude-Aimee Leblanc 77 - 75 152

 

 

CUT Brittany Lang 76 - 76 152

 

 

CUT Benyapa Niphatsophon 78 - 75 153

 

 

CUT Mi Jung Hur 77 - 76 153

 

CUT Christina Kim 77 - 76 153

 

CUT Paula Reto 75 - 78 153

 

CUT Nicole Broch Larsen 79 - 75 154

 

CUT Simin Feng 76 - 78 154

 

CUT Lee Lopez 81 - 75 156

 

 

CUT Becky Morgan 79 - 77 156

 

 

CUT Jackie Stoelting 78 - 78 156

 

 

CUT Nannette Hill 75 - 81 156

 

 

CUT Yuting Shi 79 - 78 157

 

 

CUT Anne-Catherine Tanguay 77 - 81 158

 

 

CUT Ji Eun Kim 78 - 81 159

 

Do you really think that a true scratch or plus handicap doesn't have a chance of shooting 75-81?

Sure, he might shoot 75-75 and miss the cut. Pernilla Lindbergh is on your list at 79-73. Would the scratch have won at the ANA shooting 65-67-70-71? Seems highly unlikely doesn't it? Marina Alex is on your list at 76-74. 10 of her last 26 rounds are in the 60's and she's averaging 71.09 this year on tour. I'm sure your average scratch could do that if he was really about a +3.

 

Handicaps are an interesting thing. We hear "scratch" and think that means the player averages about par. In reality he will average about 3 over the course rating and only even shoot the rating about 1 time in 4. So yes, he could perhaps make a very rare occasional cut.

 

You’re exactly right. I carry a .5 handicap to be exact and my scoring average is roughly 76.

[deadsolid...shank]

It’s getting like the other similar threads. We don’t have any parameters.

 

Obee just put this out there that it will be a nice comparison, finally playing the same course under similar conditions. Really nothing more.

 

We’ve all dragged it out further. What are we asking? I don’t think anyone expects our scratch would ever seriously compete in an LPGA tournament. But there is a real good chance he beats a few over a couple days. Like Shilgy says, the scratch probably averages three over. If he plays a 72 rated course, that’s two day total around 150. DP just posted that several ladies were higher than that. And most of the scratches most likely will be also.

 

But not all of them. It’s not being disingenuous to the ladies, it’s simply looking at the numbers.

[DavePelz4]

I will take the ladies by a LARGE margin don't care about the course length much either. Not even close fellas and I have played at scratch and I have played with LPGA, PGA, Web.Com and Senior PGA players.

 

You will get smoked!

 

It's always amusing to me when guys throw in their opinion based on the thread title without bothering to read the previous 6 pages.... :rofl:

 

I have read the above post's. Just think it funny that "Average Joes" want to compare themselves to elite professionals.

 

I will take the ladies every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

 

People are looking at the top of the leaderboard...here's part of the bottom of the leaderboard from 2 weeks ago:

 

CUT Paula Creamer 72 - 77 149

 

CUT Kassidy Teare 72 - 77 149

 

CUT Kelly Shon 71 - 78 149

 

CUT Marina Alex 76 - 74 150

 

CUT Joanna Klatten 75 - 75 150

 

CUT Yani Tseng 75 - 75 150

 

CUT Chella Choi 74 - 76 150

 

CUT Lindsey Weaver 74 - 76 150

 

 

CUT Min Lee 73 - 77 150

 

 

CUT Sarah Jane Smith 78 - 73 151

 

CUT Erynne Lee 77 - 74 151

 

CUT Sherman Santiwiwatthanaphong 77 - 74 151

 

CUT Kris Tamulis 76 - 75 151

 

 

CUT Megan Khang 75 - 76 151

 

 

CUT Robynn Ree 75 - 76 151

 

CUT Mel Reid 75 - 76 151

 

 

CUT Thidapa Suwannapura 75 - 76 151

 

 

CUT Cindy LaCrosse 74 - 77 151

 

CUT Katherine Perry 74 - 77 151

 

 

CUT Pernilla Lindberg 79 - 73 152

 

 

CUT Mina Harigae 78 - 74 152

 

CUT Morgan Pressel 78 - 74 152

 

 

CUT Brianna Do 77 - 75 152

 

CUT Maude-Aimee Leblanc 77 - 75 152

 

 

CUT Brittany Lang 76 - 76 152

 

 

CUT Benyapa Niphatsophon 78 - 75 153

 

 

CUT Mi Jung Hur 77 - 76 153

 

CUT Christina Kim 77 - 76 153

 

CUT Paula Reto 75 - 78 153

 

CUT Nicole Broch Larsen 79 - 75 154

 

CUT Simin Feng 76 - 78 154

 

CUT Lee Lopez 81 - 75 156

 

 

CUT Becky Morgan 79 - 77 156

 

 

CUT Jackie Stoelting 78 - 78 156

 

 

CUT Nannette Hill 75 - 81 156

 

 

CUT Yuting Shi 79 - 78 157

 

 

CUT Anne-Catherine Tanguay 77 - 81 158

 

 

CUT Ji Eun Kim 78 - 81 159

 

Do you really think that a true scratch or plus handicap doesn't have a chance of shooting 75-81?

Sure, he might shoot 75-75 and miss the cut. Pernilla Lindbergh is on your list at 79-73. Would the scratch have won at the ANA shooting 65-67-70-71? Seems highly unlikely doesn't it? Marina Alex is on your list at 76-74. 10 of her last 26 rounds are in the 60's and she's averaging 71.09 this year on tour. I'm sure your average scratch could do that if he was really about a +3.

 

Handicaps are an interesting thing. We hear "scratch" and think that means the player averages about par. In reality he will average about 3 over the course rating and only even shoot the rating about 1 time in 4. So yes, he could perhaps make a very rare occasional cut.

 

All of my posts have said that over then long term the lpga pro wins the vast majority of the time.

 

But...1 round...anything can happen.

[dhc1]

All of my posts have said that over then long term the lpga pro wins the vast majority of the time.

 

But...1 round...anything can happen.

 

Would you take the 150th ranked LPGA pro whose recent rounds indicate a men's 1.9 index (as per Argonne) vs. a scratch male amateur over a long series of rounds?

[Shilgy]

All of my posts have said that over then long term the lpga pro wins the vast majority of the time.

 

But...1 round...anything can happen.

 

Would you take the 150th ranked LPGA pro whose recent rounds indicate a men's 1.9 index (as per Argonne) vs. a scratch male amateur over a long series of rounds?

As I mentioned earlier there certainly is a lack of depth on the LPGA. Players in the 130-150 range are not as close to being competitive as #200+ on the mens. So your scratch can hang his hat on being able to topple them in a round.

 

But then he would struggle against the 57 year old occasional LPGA player also.

 

Funny how this goes. When discussing men's golf all we hear is "scratch ain't s**t" . But against the woman he turns into a 280+ yard driving, green hitting putting machine.

 

Some of the players in Obee's tournament will score better than some of the LPGA players did. In their one event compared to the ladies one event.

[deadsolid...shank]

All of my posts have said that over then long term the lpga pro wins the vast majority of the time.

 

But...1 round...anything can happen.

 

Would you take the 150th ranked LPGA pro whose recent rounds indicate a men's 1.9 index (as per Argonne) vs. a scratch male amateur over a long series of rounds?

 

Just spitballing here, but I would guess the scratch would take maybe 3 out of 10rounds. That’s about how often I straight up beat a person who is a couple strokes lower on handicap. Again, so so much depends on the type of scratch. The one who establishes his scratch cap slapping it around with his buddies, taking liberal gimmies and is maybe a little loose with the rules, he maybe doesn’t win any. The one who plays a lot of legimate, competitive rounds I thinks fares ok (he’s the 3 out of 10guy).

 

All of my posts have said that over then long term the lpga pro wins the vast majority of the time.

 

But...1 round...anything can happen.

 

Would you take the 150th ranked LPGA pro whose recent rounds indicate a men's 1.9 index (as per Argonne) vs. a scratch male amateur over a long series of rounds?

As I mentioned earlier there certainly is a lack of depth on the LPGA. Players in the 130-150 range are not as close to being competitive as #200+ on the mens. So your scratch can hang his hat on being able to topple them in a round.

 

But then he would struggle against the 57 year old occasional LPGA player also.

 

Funny how this goes. When discussing men's golf all we hear is "scratch ain't s**t" . But against the woman he turns into a 280+ yard driving, green hitting putting machine.

 

Some of the players in Obee's tournament will score better than some of the LPGA players did. In their one event compared to the ladies one event.

 

I think that’s all Obee was putting it out there for, a fun comparison. In one setting.

[jmck]

Sure, he might shoot 75-75 and miss the cut. Pernilla Lindbergh is on your list at 79-73. Would the scratch have won at the ANA shooting 65-67-70-71? Seems highly unlikely doesn't it? Marina Alex is on your list at 76-74. 10 of her last 26 rounds are in the 60's and she's averaging 71.09 this year on tour. I'm sure your average scratch could do that if he was really about a +3.

 

Handicaps are an interesting thing. We hear "scratch" and think that means the player averages about par. In reality he will average about 3 over the course rating and only even shoot the rating about 1 time in 4. So yes, he could perhaps make a very rare occasional cut.

 

^^^^ This. Every single time this thread comes up posters come out of the woodwork who totally misunderstand the difference between what scores make up a handicap versus what makes up a year long scoring average on the LPGA tour.

[dhc1]

Just spitballing here, but I would guess the scratch would take maybe 3 out of 10rounds. That's about how often I straight up beat a person who is a couple strokes lower on handicap. Again, so so much depends on the type of scratch. The one who establishes his scratch cap slapping it around with his buddies, taking liberal gimmies and is maybe a little loose with the rules, he maybe doesn't win any. The one who plays a lot of legimate, competitive rounds I thinks fares ok (he's the 3 out of 10guy).

 

I'm not sure I follow: the men's scratch is 2 strokes better than the 150th ranked LPGA pro according to Argonne's analysis (i.e., she's a 2, not a +2). You don't believe that handicaps are valid and therefore you'd prefer the 2 over a scratch player? or that this comparison doesn't work?

[dhc1]

Sure, he might shoot 75-75 and miss the cut. Pernilla Lindbergh is on your list at 79-73. Would the scratch have won at the ANA shooting 65-67-70-71? Seems highly unlikely doesn't it? Marina Alex is on your list at 76-74. 10 of her last 26 rounds are in the 60's and she's averaging 71.09 this year on tour. I'm sure your average scratch could do that if he was really about a +3.

 

Handicaps are an interesting thing. We hear "scratch" and think that means the player averages about par. In reality he will average about 3 over the course rating and only even shoot the rating about 1 time in 4. So yes, he could perhaps make a very rare occasional cut.

 

^^^^ This. Every single time this thread comes up posters come out of the woodwork who totally misunderstand the difference between what scores make up a handicap versus what makes up a year long scoring average on the LPGA tour.

 

Care to respond to Argonne's calculated handicap of the 150th ranked player? It's been calculated as equivalent to men's 1.9 index over the season.

[dhc1]

All of my posts have said that over then long term the lpga pro wins the vast majority of the time.

 

But...1 round...anything can happen.

 

Would you take the 150th ranked LPGA pro whose recent rounds indicate a men's 1.9 index (as per Argonne) vs. a scratch male amateur over a long series of rounds?

As I mentioned earlier there certainly is a lack of depth on the LPGA. Players in the 130-150 range are not as close to being competitive as #200+ on the mens. So your scratch can hang his hat on being able to topple them in a round.

 

But then he would struggle against the 57 year old occasional LPGA player also.

 

Funny how this goes. When discussing men's golf all we hear is "scratch ain't s**t" . But against the woman he turns into a 280+ yard driving, green hitting putting machine.

 

Some of the players in Obee's tournament will score better than some of the LPGA players did. In their one event compared to the ladies one event.

 

Shilgy,

 

You didn't answer the question: would you take the 150th LPGA player with a calculated index of 1.9 over a men's scratch in a series of matches over an extended period of time (not just one round)? Let's assume that the men's scratch is also based off of T scores (and I could care less about distances hit, as the score is the score and the math is the math.....)

 

I wholeheartedly agree that there's a sharp distinction between the top of the LPGA and the bottom. It's unclear where the kink in the curve is but the leading players are well into the + figures even on the men's scale. It does appear that the bottom end is at or above men's scratch however.