What level of scoring do you like in PGA tournaments?

[DaveP043]

To follow up on a discussion that seemed to me to be veering off-topic in another thread, I'll start this one.  The question is essentially what level of scoring do you like to see in a PGA Tournament?  Would you like to see a course set up similarly to the way it is most of the year, and watch the tour players go really low?  Keep the rough mowed, use the normal back tees, just set it up like always.  That would certainly give us a good idea of how much better the touring pros are, as compared to regular golfers.  Or would you prefer to see a course lengthened and toughened (narrower fairways, faster greens, higher rough, etc), with the US Open being an extreme example, so that even the best players are somewhere around par, or a little below?  I'll keep my opinion to myself, for now.

[StrokerAce]

Narrow fairways

Thick rough

Long approaches

Small greens

Fair but tough... much tougher than what the weekend warrior has to deal with.

Accuracy > distance

Maybe the US might win a Ryder Cup in Europe if they tried that more...

[MaxEntropy]

Occasionally I like to see them go way low, but in general, I want to see them tested. I already know they are all very good, so I would like to see them make it tough most of the time.

[Mr_Theoo]

Fair, set it up to challenge the players however that may be. But have it fair to the entire field. Now the one thing you can’t control is Mother Nature so if the weather dictates that it needs to be toughen up or eased up after a day then do it don’t be afraid to adjust to what’s happening

[GB13]

I like to see it set up as a fair yet challenging test. If most courses are setup like Le Golf National, I would be happy. 

It might be nice to see a once a year tournament on a course like we would play, with really low scores. It would give us an idea of how much better the pros are than us. 

I just don't want to watch Driver wedge, week in and week out. 

[revkev]

I think that it's pretty close to right currently in that there is a wide variety of scoring on tour in events.  We go from the US Open, around par, to some desert events where the mid 20's to even closer to 30 under win.  The tour should test all types of skill level and it does.

My one complaint would be that the first three playoff events are on very similar types of go low courses that reward length while the actual Tour Championship is on a course with Southern Grasses - that scenario seems to favor certain players.

 

Pro Ams have relatively calm course conditions, so we get that, during the course of the season there will be a variety of weather conditions, a couple of the Florida courses will play brutal and the winning score will be between 5 and 10 under - that will happen somewhere else along the way - the US Open often pushes par -

There's pretty much something for everyone so any other complaints other than the one would be nit picking.

[RickyBobby_PR]

I want guys to be challenged but not penalized for hitting golf shots. Imo the players is perfect type course. It’s fun watching scoring feasts but I like seeing creativity come into play 

[srooch2]

I'm never one who cares about scoring, I like an exciting close finish. That being said I do like them to be tested, but I realize they can't do this every tournament or the majors wouldn't be as "major"

Sent from my VS988 using MyGolfSpy mobile app

[Badams69]

Personally I prefer professional tournaments that result in scores closest to the 280-288 realm.

I'm not a fan of pros just bullying a golf course, sort of seems the venue was poorly chosen.

I feel that the true "leaderboard" should be finishing 280 - 285 top 10 or 20 and 285-300 or so for the rest of the field.

[JAGolfore]

I like to bring up Hilton Head. The winning score this year was -12. That’s perfect. A course you have to think and play your way around. Not just see how far we can hit the ball and be wowed when we get 50 yards of roll.


Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

[DaveP043]

Now that I've seen a few responses, I'll chime in too.  I like to see a course that will challenge the best players, so that means rough that they would prefer to avoid, difficult pin placements on a significant number of holes, as someone else said, "tough but fair."  I wouldn't want to punish big hitters unfairly, but I would like to see wayward drives be penalized in some way.  I don't think that even par (even "lowered" par) is necessarily a good thing, but 6 to 12 under seems like kind of the sweet spot to me, a fair balance between tough and score-able. 20 under or more seems just too easy, even knowing how good these guys really are

[PlaidJacket]

I started with Daves initial post and scrolled down to read his opinion. I pretty much agree.

I've said it before in one post or another that I think many tournaments are boring because the courses are easy. Driver-wedge-putter. Hole after hole after hole. Zzzzzzzzzz.  I want to see courses setup tougher. I'd like to see the pros hit a 4i, 5i occasionally. I'd certainly not make every hole a long drive contest. Sure, give them one for that show every now and then and make those holes an event unto itself. Build the drama leading up to the Big Drive on a hold. But the next hole or two might make a guy think twice and decide to hit a 3 or 4 wood. Perhaps a 3i. 

The rough at my Big Time Pro tournament might also vary by hole. Some longer than others. Shave it down around the water.  Bunkers..... they'd all be deeply cornrowed and stay that way. Now aim for a bunker boys! Greens? Fast. Green reading using their three-ring binders? Banned at my tournament. Oh, my tournament course would be long. You'll be challenged to use every club in your bag. Not three clubs only. Scoring at my Big Time Pro Tournament? Certainly not 20 under. Perhaps 10...12? if you can light it up for four days.

[null]

They're all playing the same course, so for me it really doesn't matter what the scores are.

[Mr. 82]

My frame of reference starts with TPC Sawgrass, or a course like Le Golf National that they played the Ryder Cup on. I think that whenever you start a discussion on winning score for a tour event, you have to consider the golf course that you play that tournament on before anything else. Certain courses for the PGA Tour there isn't much you can do to prevent these guys from shooting 64 or better every single day.

Now before I say anything further, I would fire the USGA from any course setup discussion. I don't want a tricked up golf courses, or greens that roll like concrete and repel good shots. If a guy is putting the ball in the fairway, his approach shot, if it hits the green, should be rewarded with a birdie putt. And he shouldn't be limited to a 2 yard wide area to land the ball in, or else the ball ends up down in a gulley or off of the back of the green, or if he lands too short on the green the false front takes his ball and now he's left with a 30 yard chip back onto the green. In short, what the USGA does to golf courses is not golf. All they are missing is a clowns mouth to make it what it truly is, a complete joke.

In spite of the fact that the US team got hammered in France, I absolutely love the layout of that course. I'd grow the rough exactly like they did, and my course would have plenty of water on it to punish wayward shots. I would absolutely neutralize the bomb and gauge players, and force the best players to hit it in the fairway, or walk off the hole with bogey or worse. Every shot you hit should count and this business of blasting it 340 yards into an adjacent fairway, and recovering with some approach shot that allows you a decent opportunity for birdie is not the way my golf course would be set up. You spray it onto another hole, you'll have trees blocking every angle you would consider hitting it towards the green, and you'd be left with nothing but a punch out back onto the right fairway. And there would be enough holes with water left and right that would take care of those wayward tee shots. If you hit the ball in the fairway, and hit a good, solid approach shot, you'll have a makeable birdie putt every time.

I don't consider it bad if a player is able to shoot 63 or 64 on a golf course like TPC Sawgrass or Le Golf National. That just tells me that they brought their "A" game and they were rewarded for their shotmaking abilities. But also know that my course would have them using just about all 14 clubs in their bag. Is it bad to have forced carries, and layups off of the tee to a yardage on par 4s and 5s? I don't think so. I want to see how well you hit all 14 clubs, and not just 3 or 4 as you driver/wedge your way around a golf course. That's not golf.

Just look at the scores from The Players, and that's about what I would be happy with. But I'd also like to see Augusta National grow their rough to the point where if a player pushes his drive right on #11 that he's screwed and will be forced to simply punch out with a wedge and no more. I've seen too many drives in the trees on the right on that hole, and then Tiger just chokes down on a 6 iron and blasts it pin high to the right of that green. You want to take driver on #13 at Augusta and miss it into the trees on the right? I'm gonna remove that pine straw and replace it with 3 feet of fescue. Augusta's biggest defense are those lightning fast greens. They should do more to penalize these wayward drives. Phil Mickelson shouldn't be able to rip a 6 iron off of the pine straw on #13 and have a 6 foot putt for eagle. He should be walking off of that hole with no better than bogey after a crappy drive like that.

Well, I've said too much already. I just get tired of seeing pros hit recovery shots from really bad and wayward drives that anyone else would not be able to recover from. If that means they take iron off of every tee, well that's their problem if they can't hit it straight. But in my tournament you won't be making the cut if you can't hit fairways. Simple as that.

[fixyurdivot]

5 hours ago, MaxEntropy said:

Occasionally I like to see them go way low, but in general, I want to see them tested. I already know they are all very good, so I would like to see them make it tough most of the time.

Me too.  I'd like to see more courses set up more difficult and red scores staying in single digits.  When a course is handing them their asses, it makes me want to say "welcome to my world gentlemen". 

[Kor.A.Door]

I like a mix of different setups. There are courses that are tougher and need to be set up to  be tough. Then there are easier courses that are just easier, so don’t try to make them tougher, let the scores be low. Opens should be tough. I don’t want to see the same thing every week. These guys are extremely good, there’s no reason to leave a course setup the same as the weekend golfer. They don’t play “easy” courses anyway, so when I say “easy” it’s still a difficult track for the everyday guy. Give me variety in scoring, that keeps it interesting from week to week. 

[revkev]

I like a mix of different setups. There are courses that are tougher and need to be set up to  be tough. Then there are easier courses that are just easier, so don’t try to make them tougher, let the scores be low. Opens should be tough. I don’t want to see the same thing every week. These guys are extremely good, there’s no reason to leave a course setup the same as the weekend golfer. They don’t play “easy” courses anyway, so when I say “easy” it’s still a difficult track for the everyday guy. Give me variety in scoring, that keeps it interesting from week to week. 

I’m so with you.

There’s a nice balance -


Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

[Charli]

I want them to be challenged differently often. I don’t really care how but thick rough Water bunkers everywhere impossible greens etc. Some will still kill the courses but some it will destroy. I also don’t mind the -20 weekends just means you better shoot low to keep up and leads to very exciting endings. 

[Kenny B]

Golf is a game of shotmaking.  Bomb and gouge is not shotmaking.  Bombing is fine if they can do it accurately, but gouging should not result in an easy birdie chance unless there was a great shot that had risk involved.  IMO the pros have gotten away from the ability to "work the ball."  They don't have to do that much anymore.  Some have the ability, and it's fun to watch but they just don't have to unless it's a necessity.  Bubba's the exception.  The golfers I like to watch are those that place the ball off the tee in position to attack a flag, or if they aren't in position, they work the ball into the green to give the the best opportunity to score.  I don't have a problem with pros going low if they can do that.  If their games aren't up to doing that, well... get better, because a tournament course should preclude low scores if they don't have a complete game.

[tommc23]

30 minutes ago, Kenny B said:

Golf is a game of shotmaking.  Bomb and gouge is not shotmaking.  Bombing is fine if they can do it accurately, but gouging should not result in an easy birdie chance unless there was a great shot that had risk involved.  IMO the pros have gotten away from the ability to "work the ball."  They don't have to do that much anymore.  Some have the ability, and it's fun to watch but they just don't have to unless it's a necessity.  Bubba's the exception.  The golfers I like to watch are those that place the ball off the tee in position to attack a flag, or if they aren't in position, they work the ball into the green to give the the best opportunity to score.  I don't have a problem with pros going low if they can do that.  If their games aren't up to doing that, well... get better, because a tournament course should preclude low scores if they don't have a complete game.

This right here pretty much explains my feelings. I've been reading this thread and couldn't word my response but Kenny did it for me

[EthanSterlingPrice]

Middle level scoring I think provides the best for viewing purposes but course setups as they are now have a good thing going for the most part, I do question the two opens occasionally. Bottom line for me (and I know this isn’t always possible) would be reward good quality golf of any style a bomber on his game should be rewarded and go low, so should a position player. I really think The Masters is a good example of multiple styles of golf being successful at one event.

Set up a fair challenge and if they go low they earned it, they plod along they shoot par, they stink it up miss the cut. Nothing to it except the millions of other things that go into a tournament prep...


Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

[Badams69]

Generally I agree with you guys who say you like variety in the performance from tourney to tourney.  My only slight differentiation would be that, in an ideal scenario, I'd prefer this to come in the form of course style and setup with scoring being more moderate.  One week it could super older American style tree-lined course with another week may be target based with mega water hazard then maybe links-ish style. 

If there is a 22 under performance a few times a year that's great, just seems those happen all too often now. 

Maybe that is just my imagination.