If "The difference between a Tour pro and a scratch is 15 strokes" then....

[EKELLY]

LET'S start with a scratch that can ACTUALLY play to scratch in the presence of a PGA Tour/Champions Tour player??? Right there alone you just eliminated 75% of the "alleged" scratches out there........I'm a +2 and change, even I'll admit I'm probably a 1 around my little circle of A players, which occasionally includes a few guys some of you have heard of that CAN'T stay on the Champions Tour......

 

Why is there always an assumption in these threads that most scratches are liars?

 

I've known vanity caps but probably 95% of the people I know of all abilities enter their scores properly

As ForgedForever would say, you have scratch, and tournament scratch.......Astronomical difference......That was really my point, Jeff......Apologies!....

[lowheel]

LET'S start with a scratch that can ACTUALLY play to scratch in the presence of a PGA Tour/Champions Tour player??? Right there alone you just eliminated 75% of the "alleged" scratches out there........I'm a +2 and change, even I'll admit I'm probably a 1 around my little circle of A players, which occasionally includes a few guys some of you have heard of that CAN'T stay on the Champions Tour......

 

Why is there always an assumption in these threads that most scratches are liars?

 

I've known vanity caps but probably 95% of the people I know of all abilities enter their scores properly

As ForgedForever would say, you have scratch, and tournament scratch.......Astronomical difference......That was really my point, Jeff......Apologies!....

 

 

This cant be repeated enough.Ive had this discussion with obee several times. Also tom pernice is 60!!! a in great shape 60 year old but still 60. Most champion tour players who win are always below 55 (except for that freak langer) so if youre using him as a yardstick its not really accurate. Home course scratches also get exposed

[bscinstnct]

Differences?

 

Put a scratch on the tee box with 50 people with cameras watching and a network crew.

 

See how they do ; )

 

 

Also, there was a UK pro, cant remember who. He played with an amateur who asked him the difference. The pro missed every green on purpose and got up and down from everywhere.

 

Crazy confidence to get the ball in the whole no matter where they lie.

[Loki]

Differences?

 

Put a scratch on the tee box with 50 people with cameras watching and a network crew.

 

See how they do ; )

 

 

Also, there was a UK pro, cant remember who. He played with an amateur who asked him the difference. The pro missed every green on purpose and got up and down from everywhere.

 

Crazy confidence to get the ball in the whole no matter where they lie.

 

Wasn't that Jackie Burke? Shot 72, even?

[golf1010]

A scratch playing Augusta under tournament conditions is 15 all day long.

A casual round probably 10.-12

Playing at the scratchs muni probably 5.

I think this makes sense

[NorthTexasGlfr]

Take a look at this...

 

 

I think it's an eye opener

 

 

Enjoyed watching that just because I'm familiar with the course.

 

Kind of sorta related to this thread, a friend and myself played the tips there (Stonebridge Dye Course) a few summers ago just for the heck of it. I'm a shorter hitting high single digit handicap and the day we played it was a 2-3 club wind so I wasn't sure if I could even break a 100. Managed to keep it in the low 90's.

[Oh Hi Carl]

There's a huge difference between the two but it's not close to 15 strokes

[Shilgy]

^^ Look at it this way....the typical tour course would probably have a course rating approaching 76 or so in tournament conditions. Many of them would be rated higher. The mid range of the kept the card tour pro averaged about 70.5 last year. The way the handicap system works a player will average about three strokes over their cap. So the average player is about a +9 or so. Then add in the typical scratch is NOT shooting the same in tournament conditions*** and all that entails. So maybe not 15 but a dozen sounds good.

 

 

*** In genera the mythical “wrx tournament tested scratch” is more in the +2 to +4 range. Like Obee, Isaac and others. They definitely are not typically 0 index.

[nmpete11]

There are so many factors to this. The difficulty of the course, the setup of the course, the length of the course, course conditions, etc. Are we also factoring in the nerves and pressure that a tour pro plays under? If you put a normal scratch amateur and let them tee it up during a tour event 15 might even be low.

[MtlJeff]

LET'S start with a scratch that can ACTUALLY play to scratch in the presence of a PGA Tour/Champions Tour player??? Right there alone you just eliminated 75% of the "alleged" scratches out there........I'm a +2 and change, even I'll admit I'm probably a 1 around my little circle of A players, which occasionally includes a few guys some of you have heard of that CAN'T stay on the Champions Tour......

 

Why is there always an assumption in these threads that most scratches are liars?

 

I've known vanity caps but probably 95% of the people I know of all abilities enter their scores properly

As ForgedForever would say, you have scratch, and tournament scratch.......Astronomical difference......That was really my point, Jeff......Apologies!....

 

I think the difference is only significant in tournaments though. I think in a casual round, there isn't much difference. One can handle pressure and the other is not used to pressure. In a casual round there's no pressure and the players are mostly equal. Ive "beaten" guys in casual rounds I'll readily admit would probably whoop me on 3-4 round tournament

 

Speaking of my old friend Forged, one thing I know about him is he loves placekickers. It's the same thing there, there's 1000 guys , maybe more, who would look like Adam Vinatieri in a casual day of practice.

 

To me talent and mental toughness are different things, handicap only accounts for talent. So it depends what kind of round the OP is playing.

 

Just as it depends if a 60yd field goal is for the super bowl, or just on an empty field. The ability to do it physically doesn't change with either situation

[Jordan Speeth]

Goydos was on our practice tee one morning recently warming up for a game with a lady friend. His ball striking is as unimpressive as it gets for a winning professional golfer. He doesn't hit it discernibly better than a scratch am as he'd admit himself....he was marveling at a group of college players further down the line, BUT, with a wedge or putter in hand, the difference is huge. He was hitting wedge to a practice green about 120 yds away and they all may well have been the same shot. They were, for the most part, all within "make" distance for him. Don't get me wrong, he hits it really well but this is where those scores come from. From 120 yards and in, the guy is throwing darts.

[Obee]

LET'S start with a scratch that can ACTUALLY play to scratch in the presence of a PGA Tour/Champions Tour player??? Right there alone you just eliminated 75% of the "alleged" scratches out there........I'm a +2 and change, even I'll admit I'm probably a 1 around my little circle of A players, which occasionally includes a few guys some of you have heard of that CAN'T stay on the Champions Tour......

 

Why is there always an assumption in these threads that most scratches are liars?

 

I've known vanity caps but probably 95% of the people I know of all abilities enter their scores properly

As ForgedForever would say, you have scratch, and tournament scratch.......Astronomical difference......That was really my point, Jeff......Apologies!....

 

 

This cant be repeated enough.Ive had this discussion with obee several times. Also tom pernice is 60!!! a in great shape 60 year old but still 60. Most champion tour players who win are always below 55 (except for that freak langer) so if youre using him as a yardstick its not really accurate. Home course scratches also get exposed

 

He also finished 27th on the Schwab Cup list, had a 2nd, and two 5ths and won $770,000 last year as a professional. :-)

 

He's about as perfect a "yardstick" as you will find when it comes to a guy who is still one of the elite 100 senior golfers in the world. Sure, he ain't Langer, but he's made a wonderful living as a professional golfer for a lonnnnng time, and continues to do so. :-)

[Man_O_War]

if a pro plays the same tees/course as the scratch player, the difference would be massive.. same if the scratch player played from the pro tees and pro course set up.

 

30 strokes? I believe so truly

[golfandfishing]

if a pro plays the same tees/course as the scratch player, the difference would be massive.. same if the scratch player played from the pro tees and pro course set up.

 

30 strokes? I believe so truly

 

No. Just.......no.

[Obee]

if a pro plays the same tees/course as the scratch player, the difference would be massive.. same if the scratch player played from the pro tees and pro course set up.

 

30 strokes? I believe so truly

 

Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

 

You know we already have examples of this being done, right?

[Shilgy]

if a pro plays the same tees/course as the scratch player, the difference would be massive.. same if the scratch player played from the pro tees and pro course set up.

 

30 strokes? I believe so truly

 

Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

 

You know we already have examples of this being done, right?

30 strokes? I'm believing that over a four round event.

[Man_O_War]

if a pro plays the same tees/course as the scratch player, the difference would be massive.. same if the scratch player played from the pro tees and pro course set up.

 

30 strokes? I believe so truly

 

Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

 

You know we already have examples of this being done, right?

 

exactly... let's put a scratch player at shinnecock from the tour tees and those conditions...heck pros struggle to break 80 on such courses.. scratch player is shooting 90s-100s

[Shilgy]

if a pro plays the same tees/course as the scratch player, the difference would be massive.. same if the scratch player played from the pro tees and pro course set up.

 

30 strokes? I believe so truly

 

Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

 

You know we already have examples of this being done, right?

 

exactly... let's put a scratch player at shinnecock from the tour tees and those conditions...heck pros struggle to break 80 on such courses.. scratch player is shooting 90s-100s

Are you talking 30 per round?

[MtlJeff]

If you put 100 pros and 100 scratch players on a championship course with the over/under on the difference set at 30 strokes on average, and took bets, that would be awesome. I'd love to buy another house and car and this would be the easiest money I'd ever make.

 

30 strokes? LoL

[MtlJeff]

if a pro plays the same tees/course as the scratch player, the difference would be massive.. same if the scratch player played from the pro tees and pro course set up.

 

30 strokes? I believe so truly

 

Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

 

You know we already have examples of this being done, right?

30 strokes? I'm believing that over a four round event.

 

Over 4 rounds definitely....over one round, ummm no

[Obee]

if a pro plays the same tees/course as the scratch player, the difference would be massive.. same if the scratch player played from the pro tees and pro course set up.

 

30 strokes? I believe so truly

 

Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

 

You know we already have examples of this being done, right?

 

exactly... let's put a scratch player at shinnecock from the tour tees and those conditions...heck pros struggle to break 80 on such courses.. scratch player is shooting 90s-100s

 

Sigh....

[Pure745]

if a pro plays the same tees/course as the scratch player, the difference would be massive.. same if the scratch player played from the pro tees and pro course set up.

 

30 strokes? I believe so truly

 

Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

 

You know we already have examples of this being done, right?

 

exactly... let's put a scratch player at shinnecock from the tour tees and those conditions...heck pros struggle to break 80 on such courses.. scratch player is shooting 90s-100s

 

Sigh....

 

LOL.. +1

[golfandfishing]

if a pro plays the same tees/course as the scratch player, the difference would be massive.. same if the scratch player played from the pro tees and pro course set up.

 

30 strokes? I believe so truly

 

Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

 

You know we already have examples of this being done, right?

 

exactly... let's put a scratch player at shinnecock from the tour tees and those conditions...heck pros struggle to break 80 on such courses.. scratch player is shooting 90s-100s

 

Sigh....

 

LOL.. +1

 

+2

[lowheel]

if a pro plays the same tees/course as the scratch player, the difference would be massive.. same if the scratch player played from the pro tees and pro course set up.

 

30 strokes? I believe so truly

 

Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

 

You know we already have examples of this being done, right?

30 strokes? I'm believing that over a four round event.

 

thats what he suggested and hes right.

 

if a pro plays the same tees/course as the scratch player, the difference would be massive.. same if the scratch player played from the pro tees and pro course set up.

 

30 strokes? I believe so truly

 

Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

 

You know we already have examples of this being done, right?

 

exactly... let's put a scratch player at shinnecock from the tour tees and those conditions...heck pros struggle to break 80 on such courses.. scratch player is shooting 90s-100s

 

Sigh....

 

Hes not wrong though in that scenario he suggested.

[Shilgy]

 

Hes not wrong though in that scenario he suggested.

Then his math is just the issue? 80 minus 100 is how many? He doesn't go so far as to say the scratch is shooting in the 110's.

[Obee]

Hes not wrong though in that scenario he suggested.

 

So he's right about one thing: The difference over a four-round tournament (if that's what he meant) is about 30 strokes vs. the average score of all players. But he thinks it's 30 shots per round. Now the winner of the tournament? It could be 40 to 50 strokes, but those are two very different numbers usually. We remember the winner who shot 18-under 268, but fail to remember that the cut was 142. On a super-tough set-up like a U.S. Open, it could push 45 - 60 strokes over the four-round tournament.

 

However, if he thinks a scratch golfer (and, no, it doesn't have to be a "travelling tournament scratch," just someone who posts all their damn scores and plays by the rules of golf), is going to shoot 90 to 105 every round at Shinnecock in U.S. Open conditions, he's just ... not dealing with reality.

• At Torrey South in the 2008 U.S. Open there were 464 rounds played. The average score was 74.71
  
• Tony Romo (a 2.2 index at the time) shot 84, or approximately 9 strokes higher than the field average.
  
• Romo is now anywhere between a 1 and a +1 most months, but back then he was a 2.
  

• At Bethpage in the 2009 U.S. Open, there were 431 rounds played. The average score was 72.93
  
• Ben Roethlisberger (a 3 index at the time) shot 81 on that course, or approximately 8 strokes higher than the overall field average. Let's assume Ben focused and got down to scratch, which I'm willing to grant. But he ain't no damn +3 or +4, that's for sure.
  
• Justin Timberlake (a 6 index(!) at the time, shot 88). I've played in tournaments with Justin Timberlake. He's down to between a 0 and a 3 nowadays, but back then, he was a legit 6. He's a decent golfer. That's it. No one would say he's a "travelling, tournament scratch."
  

• At Shinnecock in the 2018 U.S. Open, there were 446 rounds rounds played with an average score of 74.65 (statistically the same as Torrey South in 2008).
  

Please explain to me how Justin Flippin' Timberlake can shoot in the 80's(!) on a course with the same stroke average as Shinnecock, but yet a "scratch player" is going to shoot 90 to 100+.

 

The only way you can possibly do it is by engaging in one of the all-time favorite logical fallacies: Special Pleading. "Well, I know that Torrey and Shinnecock played to the same average score, but they're ... different! I promise!" "And the scores they shot were on the Friday before the tournament, so during the actual tournament, the courses were easily 10 strokes harder than on the Friday before!! Maybe 20!!"

 

Puh. LEEZE.

 

And let's not forget that Pro golfers were salivating to see how high these guys would shoot. Tiger had bets with both Roethlisberger and Michael Jordan, and they both won their bets with Tiger. Jordan's number was 92, and he's a self-described "bad 4." So Tiger thought that Michael Jordan, who he knows not to be a scratch golfer, would not break 92 and Jordan goes out and shoots 88.

 

Could it be that there is a bit of exaggeration going on with regard to the difficulty of these courses as they apply to the relatively skilled amateur player? Now I get it, these types of set-ups absolutely crush the mid to high 'capper, but a reasonably skilled amateur can make their way around a damned golf course without four-putting over and over and without making eight triple-bogeys every time around an Open course.

 

You are going to have to do an absurd amount of mental gymnastics to get anyone with a brain to believe that a real scratch golfer can't easily break 100 at any U.S. Open Venue. In fact, I daresay that such a golfer would shoot in the high 80's (and probably average about that if he's not a "tournament player") far, far more frequently than they would ever shoot a round in the 100's. Now that's not to say a scratch golfer couldn't shoot 95 to 105 if they had an absolutely atrocious day and things snow-balled out of control, but those rounds would be the extreme anomaly, just like an 84 or 85 is for a scratch golfer on a normal day on a normal (72ish rating 130ish slope) course is.

 

This used to be kind of a "fun" argument, but now that Romo (and especially Roethlisberger,) have proven that a reasonably skilled golfer can shoot scores in the low to mid 80's on a U.S. Open Set-up and even guys like Timberlake and Jordan can break 90 on two of the toughest US Open venues ever, the argument is only being carried on by those who just don't want to get it and can't admit that they were wrong.

 

Add to that Steph Curry's ability to shoot within a few strokes of the field average at a Web.com event over two consecutive rounds, and then get within 2 of the field average in another round (he shot 71 when the field average was 69.22), shows that the separation between a real scratch golfer and a real professional over one round is not as much as some have wanted to believe. Get over it. The argument is done.

 

The last bit of "special pleading" that I hate is regarding the "well you're a tournament player," of course you might(?!) be able to break 100 at Shinnecock (even though I'm literally only a scratch golfer, currently a +0.4). Like MTLJeff likes to point out: Who are these mythical scratch golfers who never play tournaments and never play long, tough courses? The overwhelming majority of real scratch golfers I know played in either high school or college (though some, like myself, played other sports), and play or have played some amount of competitive golf. Do some of them choke under pressure and play like dogs when the chips are down? Like in a club championship -- especially down the stretch? Of course! That's why Steph Curry shot 71, 87(!!!!!) in this year's Web.com event. But you know what? He proved he could stay within a reasonable distance of people who play this game for living -- if only for one round. I'm guessing no one would bet on Steph Curry shooting 90 to 100+(!!!!) at a U.S. Open set-up now -- even though he did blow up one round of four playing against pros so far.

 

One final story and then I'll sit back for a bit: I have a buddy who shot an 87 in 40 mile an hour sustained winds with gusts to 60. Read that again. It wasn't an exaggeration. We still talk about it here in SoCal -- the officials, the players, it's legendary. His 87 was for medalist at his 2006(?) SCGA Am qualifier at Desert Dunes in the Palm Springs area. Balls were getting blown 50 yards down fairways. Putts would get blown off the green. 520 yard holes were four shot holes for guys who normally hit the ball 280 - 300. And he shot 87 that day. Several other scratch ams shot 91 and qualified. Those are the worst conditions I have ever heard of. The SCGA couldn't cancel the event because there was no way to re-schedule, so they just played. Robert Funk, who recently made the cut as an amateur in the last two U.S. Senior Opens, was another qualifier at 91. 91!

 

That day was tougher than any US Open course you could ever dream of in your life. Ever. And a 1-handicapper shot 87 and beat a bunch of +2 to +4 mid-ams and several Division I college kids who quit because their egos couldn't handle shooting 85 to 95, so they walked off the course.

 

100+ at Shinnecock. Yeah, right.

[isaacbm]

if a pro plays the same tees/course as the scratch player, the difference would be massive.. same if the scratch player played from the pro tees and pro course set up.

 

30 strokes? I believe so truly

 

Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

 

You know we already have examples of this being done, right?

 

exactly... let's put a scratch player at shinnecock from the tour tees and those conditions...heck pros struggle to break 80 on such courses.. scratch player is shooting 90s-100s

 

Sigh....

 

LOL.. +1

+3

[isaacbm]

Hes not wrong though in that scenario he suggested.

 

So he's right about one thing: The difference over a four-round tournament (if that's what he meant) is about 30 strokes vs. the average score of all players. But he thinks it's 30 shots per round. Now the winner of the tournament? It could be 40 to 50 strokes, but those are two very different numbers usually. We remember the winner who shot 18-under 268, but fail to remember that the cut was 142. On a super-tough set-up like a U.S. Open, it could push 45 - 60 strokes over the four-round tournament.

 

However, if he thinks a scratch golfer (and, no, it doesn't have to be a "travelling tournament scratch," just someone who posts all their damn scores and plays by the rules of golf), is going to shoot 90 to 105 every round at Shinnecock in U.S. Open conditions, he's just ... not dealing with reality.

• At Torrey South in the 2008 U.S. Open there were 464 rounds played. The average score was 74.71
  
• Tony Romo (a 2.2 index at the time) shot 84, or approximately 9 strokes higher than the field average.
  
• Romo is now anywhere between a 1 and a +1 most months, but back then he was a 2.
  

• At Bethpage in the 2009 U.S. Open, there were 431 rounds played. The average score was 72.93
  
• Ben Roethlisberger (a 3 index at the time) shot 81 on that course, or approximately 8 strokes higher than the overall field average. Let's assume Ben focused and got down to scratch, which I'm willing to grant. But he ain't no damn +3 or +4, that's for sure.
  
• Justin Timberlake (a 6 index(!) at the time, shot 88). I've played in tournaments with Justin Timberlake. He's down to between a 0 and a 3 nowadays, but back then, he was a legit 6. He's a decent golfer. That's it. No one would say he's a "travelling, tournament scratch."
  

• At Shinnecock in the 2018 U.S. Open, there were 446 rounds rounds played with an average score of 74.65 (statistically the same as Torrey South in 2008).
  

Please explain to me how Justin Flippin' Timberlake can shoot in the 80's(!) on a course with the same stroke average as Shinnecock, but yet a "scratch player" is going to shoot 90 to 100+.

 

The only way you can possibly do it is by engaging in one of the all-time favorite logical fallacies: Special Pleading. "Well, I know that Torrey and Shinnecock played to the same average score, but they're ... different! I promise!" "And the scores they shot were on the Friday before the tournament, so during the actual tournament, the courses were easily 10 strokes harder than on the Friday before!! Maybe 20!!"

 

Puh. LEEZE.

 

And let's not forget that Pro golfers were salivating to see how high these guys would shoot. Tiger had bets with both Roethlisberger and Michael Jordan, and they both won their bets with Tiger. Jordan's number was 92, and he's a self-described "bad 4." So Tiger thought that Michael Jordan, who he knows not to be a scratch golfer, would not break 92 and Jordan goes out and shoots 88.

 

Could it be that there is a bit of exaggeration going on with regard to the difficulty of these courses as they apply to the relatively skilled amateur player? Now I get it, these types of set-ups absolutely crush the mid to high 'capper, but a reasonably skilled amateur can make their way around a damned golf course without four-putting over and over and without making eight triple-bogeys every time around an Open course.

 

You are going to have to do an absurd amount of mental gymnastics to get anyone with a brain to believe that a real scratch golfer can't easily break 100 at any U.S. Open Venue. In fact, I daresay that such a golfer would shoot in the high 80's (and probably average about that if he's not a "tournament player") far, far more frequently than they would ever shoot a round in the 100's. Now that's not to say a scratch golfer couldn't shoot 95 to 105 if they had an absolutely atrocious day and things snow-balled out of control, but those rounds would be the extreme anomaly, just like an 84 or 85 is for a scratch golfer on a normal day on a normal (72ish rating 130ish slope) course is.

 

This used to be kind of a "fun" argument, but now that Romo (and especially Roethlisberger,) have proven that a reasonably skilled golfer can shoot scores in the low to mid 80's on a U.S. Open Set-up and even guys like Timberlake and Jordan can break 90 on two of the toughest US Open venues ever, the argument is only being carried on by those who just don't want to get it and can't admit that they were wrong.

 

Add to that Steph Curry's ability to shoot within a few strokes of the field average at a Web.com event over two consecutive rounds, and then get within 2 of the field average in another round (he shot 71 when the field average was 69.22), shows that the separation between a real scratch golfer and a real professional over one round is not as much as some have wanted to believe. Get over it. The argument is done.

 

The last bit of "special pleading" that I hate is regarding the "well you're a tournament player," of course you might(?!) be able to break 100 at Shinnecock (even though I'm literally only a scratch golfer, currently a +0.4). Like MTLJeff likes to point out: Who are these mythical scratch golfers who never play tournaments and never play long, tough courses? The overwhelming majority of real scratch golfers I know played in either high school or college (though some, like myself, played other sports), and play or have played some amount of competitive golf. Do some of them choke under pressure and play like dogs when the chips are down? Like in a club championship -- especially down the stretch? Of course! That's why Steph Curry shot 71, 87(!!!!!) in this year's Web.com event. But you know what? He proved he could stay within a reasonable distance of people who play this game for living -- if only for one round. I'm guessing no one would bet on Steph Curry shooting 90 to 100+(!!!!) at a U.S. Open set-up now -- even though he did blow up one round of four playing against pros so far.

 

One final story and then I'll sit back for a bit: I have a buddy who shot an 87 in 40 mile an hour sustained winds with gusts to 60. Read that again. It wasn't an exaggeration. We still talk about it here in SoCal -- the officials, the players, it's legendary. His 87 was for medalist at his 2006(?) SCGA Am qualifier at Desert Dunes in the Palm Springs area. Balls were getting blown 50 yards down fairways. Putts would get blown off the green. 520 yard holes were four shot holes for guys who normally hit the ball 280 - 300. And he shot 87 that day. Several other scratch ams shot 91 and qualified. Those are the worst conditions I have ever heard of. The SCGA couldn't cancel the event because there was no way to re-schedule, so they just played. Robert Funk, who recently made the cut as an amateur in the last two U.S. Senior Opens, was another qualifier at 91. 91!

 

That day was tougher than any US Open course you could ever dream of in your life. Ever. And a 1-handicapper shot 87 and beat a bunch of +2 to +4 mid-ams and several Division I college kids who quit because their egos couldn't handle shooting 85 to 95, so they walked off the course.

 

100+ at Shinnecock. Yeah, right.

 

+1000

 

Snap the fug out of it people!

A scratch would break 100 with a rental set and no pins in the greens!

 

(I actually had a bet like that at one point... I bet a guy I could take any five clubs from the ladies rental rack and break 80 at PGA West Stadium course the day after Q school. I shot 78. 100??? LMAO! )

[C-Law]

Hes not wrong though in that scenario he suggested.

 

Now I get it, these types of set-ups absolutely crush the mid to high 'capper, but a reasonably skilled amateur can make their way around a damned golf course without four-putting over and over and without making eight triple-bogeys every time around an Open course.

 

 

 

^ This part. Scratch golfers don't randomly start topping the ball, chunking chips, blading bunker shots because the golf course around them happens to be more difficult. The difference is chipping out to 20 feet for par instead of trying to get it inside 5. Missing a few more fairways turning birdie chance holes into par saves. That does not equate to 30 shots in a round.

[justwellsy]

I think the biggest factor here is green speed. Most scratch amateurs have never played a round with the green speeds at "tour event" level. If the scratch amateur was allowed to consistently play with those green speeds and get used to them, I think the gap would close. But if we are talking about a normal match at a tour level green speed course, then it may be close to 15 strokes difference. Now if we're talking about playing a course with greens that run about a 9 on the stimp, I'd give the edge to the scratch as far as it being less than a 15 stroke difference. Pros struggle pretty good when they suddenly switch to slower green speeds if they are not given time to adjust