Connect with us

Opinion & Analysis

Want to be an elite junior golfer? Play a shorter and easier home course

Published

on

Let’s start with a thought experiment: You’re building a long-term plan with your parents to become a world-class golfer. You create a list. How important is being a member of a nice golf course? Is it worth the money to join somewhere swanky, or will the local muni do?

If you are like most junior golfers I have spoken to, facilities matter, and you want to be a member of that 7400-yard course with perfect greens. Based on this preference, I wanted to look at the data; what type of courses produce PGA Tour players? What can we learn from them? With the help of many of my friends in golf, I started to compile a list of PGA Tour players and their home golf courses when they were between 12-16 years old.

Here is what I came up with

  • Justin Thomas – Harmony Landing: 6,645 (130 course rating)
  • Justin Rose – North Hants: 6,250
  • Brooks Koepka – Bear Lakes: 7,439 (141)
  • Jordan Spieth – Brookhaven: 6,820 (133)
  • Rory McIlroy – Hollywood Golf Club: 6,056
  • Bubba Watson – Tanglewood Golf Club: 6,302 (124)
  • Phil Mickelson – Stardust: 6,550 (126)
  • Zach Johnson – Elmhurst: 6,500 (128)
  • Webb Simpson – Raleigh Golf: 6,869 (135)
  • Bryson DeChambeau – Dragon Fly: 7,273 (135)
  • Ryan Moore – The Classic: 6,903 (134)
  • Tiger Woods – Navy Golf Course: 6,780 (129)
  • Ollie Sciednerjans – Bentwater: 6,741 (142)
  • Xander Schauffele – Bernardo Heights: 6,679 (131)
  • Chez Reavie – Dobson Ranch: 6,630 (121)
  • Patrick Cantlay – Virginia Country Club: 6,633 (130)
  • Jason Dufner – Weston Hills: 7,060 (129)
  • Adam Hadwin – Morgan Creek: 6,948 (136)
  • Emiliano Grillio -Chaco Golf Club: 6,749 (130)
  • Charles Howell III – Augusta Country Club: 7,125 (136)
  • Julian Suri – South Hampton: 7,028 (138)
  • Aaron Wise – Eagle Glen: 6,869 (139)
  • Peter Uihlein – IMG Academy: 6,842 (136)
  • Brandon Stone – Centurion: 6,830 (131)

Starting to notice something? Based on the data of these 24 PGA Tour players, their average home course has a yardage of 6,772 and slope of 132. Wowzers! Can’t believe it? It makes perfect sense: To be competitive in golf, you must shoot under par. Shooting under par, like riding a bike, or walking, or writing, is a skill. It is developed through a combination of repetition and feedback.

Easier golf courses allow players the opportunity to shoot lower scores and build confidence. Over time, these skills become habit. When players enter tournaments, it is more likely they shoot under par. Breaking par at your home golf course is only the first step towards becoming an elite junior golfer. The data suggests that players (both boys and girls) need to average approximately 69 per round to win on the AJGA — on 6,800-yard courses for boys and just under 6,000 yards for girls.

No major championship venue has ever had a junior member go on to win, or even play, the PGA Tour. That’s right: the PGA Tour is not filled with junior members from Augusta National. Why? Because while playing Shinnecock Hills is an absolute treat, the course is extremely difficult, and 74 is a great score. Junior members at such courses create habits of shooting 74, and when they enter tournaments, like the AJGA, in general, they get beat.

So where should you be a member if you are a junior golfer with aspirations of college golf or beyond? Great question. In an ideal world the course would have the following:

  1. Unlimited access to a facility that is approximately 6,700 yards long with a slope of about 130. The goal on this golf course is to break par often and work towards a handicap of +3 by your 18th birthday.
  2. Somewhere with other talented players. Although, it would be great if they are other juniors, more importantly you want players of about the same skill who will offer you a competitive match a couple times a week.

As always, if you have any feedback on this article or a story idea, please feel free to reach out to me! Always love hearing from people and helping them connect with schools that meet their academic, athletic, social and financial needs!

B.M. Ryan, an entrepreneur and scientist, is a passionate golfer who loves his local muni. Armed with a keen interest in the game, a large network of friends in the industry, Brendan works to find and produce unique content for GolfWRX.

22 Comments

22 Comments

  1. Craig

    Oct 6, 2018 at 7:23 am

    I totally agree with this article. I remember watching the doco The Short Game and those kids were playing ridiculously short courses (3000 yrds), but they learned to go low. I compare to my own junior experience playing off the back tees as a 10 year old, breaking 80 was a miracle, let along 70, when you can only drive it 180 yds on a 400 yd hole. Getting close to shooting par was as stressful as shooting 59.

  2. R k

    Sep 18, 2018 at 12:25 pm

    Nicely done. One must walk before run.

  3. Pissant

    Sep 18, 2018 at 1:37 am

    Completely meaningless article

  4. Scheiss

    Sep 18, 2018 at 1:36 am

    That’s HOLYwood, not Hollywood, ya Yankee moron

  5. Ryan

    Sep 17, 2018 at 9:57 pm

    Since when is a 130 ish 6700 ish course easy?

    Also you are averaging a data set with a huge standard deviation… 7400 on the top end and 6000 on the short end that is a +/- of 700 yards for a total difference of 1400 yards! You can’t draw any conclusions from this data.

  6. Timothy Ahline

    Sep 17, 2018 at 4:17 pm

    Zach Johnson grew up playing Elmcrest Country Club in Cedar Rapids Iowa not Elmhurst

  7. Brandon

    Sep 17, 2018 at 2:55 pm

    Webb Simpson didn’t grow up on Raleigh golf.

    • Reid Thompson

      Oct 5, 2018 at 12:29 pm

      Agreed, pretty sure it was Carolina. Which tips out at 6200 ish. Interesting.

  8. John

    Sep 17, 2018 at 1:00 pm

    Cool article. I don’t have personal experience but I’ve been around enough elite players who have and they all agree, it’s a real thing to get to -4 to -7 and feel comfortable, and getting that comfort at a young age cannot hurt. Obviously I think the perfect situation is to grow up on a course with maybe 12 holes are really “getable”, and 6 of them are stout “par” holes.

  9. JS

    Sep 17, 2018 at 10:53 am

    I have two identical players. One plays a longer, harder course where 74 is a great score and once plays a shorter, easier course where 68 is a good score. According to this article, the player on the easier course will be better prepared for Tour by virtue of being accustomed to breaking par. There’s nothing in the article to support that conclusion.

    First, the article doesn’t show what these golfers shot on those courses. For all the reader knows, some of the golfers on the longer, harder courses could have been breaking par and the some of the golfers on the shorter, easier courses were not breaking par.

    Second, the golfers on the longer, harder could have played from a forward tee, which would make the course both shorter and easier.

    Third, perhaps the reason golfers on shorter courses do better is because they have more opportunity to play shots that are important to scoring. For example, perhaps the short course golfers hit approach shots with wedges and short irons, which are more important to scoring due to ability to hit shots close to the flag, whereas the long course golfers hit approach shots with hybrids and long irons, which are less important to scoring due to the difficulty in shots close to the flag (Even the PGA Tour leader in proximity to the hole from 175-200yd averages a 27′ first putt).

    • A. Commoner

      Sep 17, 2018 at 2:15 pm

      JS raises some valid questions. Overall, I just consider such “insightful” writing as confirmation of the old axiom: “paper will hold still for anything.”

    • Jack

      Sep 18, 2018 at 3:11 am

      I think it’s more start from the shorter tees, and get used to scoring well, and slowly move outwards. Rather than start from the blue tees and shoot 80. Go from the red tees and shoot 70 or lower. Then slowly move to the whites.

      Basically what the author is trying to say. Not just play short courses forever. I don’t know why so many are missing his perfectly logical article.

  10. GK

    Sep 17, 2018 at 1:08 am

    I don’t disagree and it’s an interesting theory as I’ve wondered what is important in courses for juniors. In fairness, Shinnecock, like many major championship venues, probably doesn’t have the best junior program that gives a lot of access to aspiring young players. I would imagine many of these courses would have forward tee options that would meet your suggested criteria but the culture of some of these clubs (And a smaller pool of players) may have a bigger role in the lack of players from major championship venues.

    Although no current PGA players, Olympic has had Johnny Miller, Bob Rosburg and Michael Allen who were junior members that played on tour. It is interesting to note that Miler often states that he developed many skills at the nearby San Francisco Club which kind of fits the criteria you advocate although developing future tour players isn’t their MO.

    Finally, although those courses listed aren’t LA North or Oakland Hills, they aren’t exactly push over courses w/ most slopes in the 130s especially for 12-16 year olds. (I guess right balance b/t challenging and not too challenging). I played golf w/ a D1 head coach from an elite university a few years ago and asked a similar question. Although he didn’t specify re: slope/length b/c he wasn’t asked & that he wished that it wasn’t this way, but most of the kids he recruited were members of a private club.

  11. TwoLegsMcManus

    Sep 16, 2018 at 10:29 pm

    Calculating averages is fine – it’s a good skill to have. Drawing conclusions from “average”, however, does not always make sense. Only a small percentage of people, for example, are exactly average height – even fewer are exactly average weight.

    Two of the longest hitters in golf – Keopka and McIlroy – illustrate the problem. Brooks’ course was 7439, Rory’s 6056. That averages to 6747, but that number says nothing about either course. How often did these players actually play their home course? The course where I “keep my (online) handicap is one I haven’t played in years.

    I think an elite junior golfer would be best served playing a variety of courses; long, short, trees, links, high-end, cheap… and vary their choice of tees to create different challenges. Sticking to one course would seem to be key to be that club’s champion, but not necessarily a game that will translate.

  12. Prime21

    Sep 16, 2018 at 9:39 pm

    Andrew Svoboda played out of Winged Foot. Spend a little more time on research prior to making blanket statements, as a writer, that is part of your job.

  13. Matt Ball

    Sep 16, 2018 at 9:12 pm

    Brendan, Meadowbrook CC outside Richmond at about 6,600 yards par 71 produced Lanny and Bobby Watkins and John Rollins. 3 kids in recent years have gone on to division 1 scholarships. This club has no time restrictions for juniors to play even weekends. Course record 59 just shot by one of those scholarship players now on mini tours. Your article I believe is dead on.

    • Point misser

      Sep 17, 2018 at 7:36 pm

      Lanny & Bobby Wadkins. And that kid who shot 59 needs to tuck in his shirt tail and tighten up his act now that he’s a “pro”

      • Point Misser Missed The Point

        Sep 18, 2018 at 5:30 am

        Shut up Point Misser you moron and tuck your tail in between your legs

  14. Peter

    Sep 16, 2018 at 8:52 pm

    I had a 15 year old girl send me her info last week and she listed her eagles. One hole stated she had driver,sw,putt. Maybe that is overdoing it on the shorter, easier home course?

    • Bryan Montgomery

      Sep 16, 2018 at 9:47 pm

      There is a lot that can be learned from shorter courses. Tour players on the LPGA and PGA have amazing short games. If you are use to playing a course that has you playing long and mid irons at all times you are not getting the wedge work that players on the shorter courses are. This article does a great job of scraping the surface of the data that is available. I would not shy away from someone who is playing a shorter course because in my experience it is easier to teach long game management over the touch that is needed in the short game.

    • Looper

      Sep 17, 2018 at 12:01 pm

      Completely agree Peter. What about talent and skill?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Opinion & Analysis

The 2 primary challenges golf equipment companies face

Published

on

As the editor-in-chief of this website and an observer of the GolfWRX forums and other online golf equipment discourse for over a decade, I’m pretty well attuned to the grunts and grumbles of a significant portion of the golf equipment purchasing spectrum. And before you accuse me of lording above all in some digital ivory tower, I’d like to offer that I worked at golf courses (public and private) for years prior to picking up my pen, so I’m well-versed in the non-degenerate golf equipment consumers out there. I touched (green)grass (retail)!

Complaints about the ills of and related to the OEMs usually follow some version of: Product cycles are too short for real innovation, tour equipment isn’t the same as retail (which is largely not true, by the way), too much is invested in marketing and not enough in R&D, top staffer X hasn’t even put the new driver in play, so it’s obviously not superior to the previous generation, prices are too high, and on and on.

Without digging into the merits of any of these claims, which I believe are mostly red herrings, I’d like to bring into view of our rangefinder what I believe to be the two primary difficulties golf equipment companies face.

One: As Terry Koehler, back when he was the CEO of Ben Hogan, told me at the time of the Ft Worth irons launch, if you can’t regularly hit the golf ball in a coin-sized area in the middle of the face, there’s not a ton that iron technology can do for you. Now, this is less true now with respect to irons than when he said it, and is less and less true by degrees as the clubs get larger (utilities, fairways, hybrids, drivers), but there remains a great deal of golf equipment truth in that statement. Think about it — which is to say, in TL;DR fashion, get lessons from a qualified instructor who will teach you about the fundamentals of repeatable impact and how the golf swing works, not just offer band-aid fixes. If you can’t repeatably deliver the golf club to the golf ball in something resembling the manner it was designed for, how can you expect to be getting the most out of the club — put another way, the maximum value from your investment?

Similarly, game improvement equipment can only improve your game if you game it. In other words, get fit for the clubs you ought to be playing rather than filling the bag with the ones you wish you could hit or used to be able to hit. Of course, don’t do this if you don’t care about performance and just want to hit a forged blade while playing off an 18 handicap. That’s absolutely fine. There were plenty of members in clubs back in the day playing Hogan Apex or Mizuno MP-32 irons who had no business doing so from a ballstriking standpoint, but they enjoyed their look, feel, and complementary qualities to their Gatsby hats and cashmere sweaters. Do what brings you a measure of joy in this maddening game.

Now, the second issue. This is not a plea for non-conforming equipment; rather, it is a statement of fact. USGA/R&A limits on every facet of golf equipment are detrimental to golf equipment manufacturers. Sure, you know this, but do you think about it as it applies to almost every element of equipment? A 500cc driver would be inherently more forgiving than a 460cc, as one with a COR measurement in excess of 0.83. 50-inch shafts. Box grooves. And on and on.

Would fewer regulations be objectively bad for the game? Would this erode its soul? Fortunately, that’s beside the point of this exercise, which is merely to point out the facts. The fact, in this case, is that equipment restrictions and regulations are the slaughterbench of an abundance of innovation in the golf equipment space. Is this for the best? Well, now I’ve asked the question twice and might as well give a partial response, I guess my answer to that would be, “It depends on what type of golf you’re playing and who you’re playing it with.”

For my part, I don’t mind embarrassing myself with vintage blades and persimmons chasing after the quasi-spiritual elevation of a well-struck shot, but that’s just me. Plenty of folks don’t give a damn if their grooves are conforming. Plenty of folks think the folks in Liberty Corner ought to add a prison to the museum for such offences. And those are just a few of the considerations for the amateur game — which doesn’t get inside the gallery ropes of the pro game…

Different strokes in the game of golf, in my humble opinion.

Anyway, I believe equipment company engineers are genuinely trying to build better equipment year over year. The marketing departments are trying to find ways to make this equipment appeal to the broadest segment of the golf market possible. All of this against (1) the backdrop of — at least for now — firm product cycles. And golfers who, with their ~15 average handicap (men), for the most part, are not striping the golf ball like Tiger in his prime and seem to have less and less time year over year to practice and improve. (2) Regulations that massively restrict what they’re able to do…

That’s the landscape as I see it and the real headwinds for golf equipment companies. No doubt, there’s more I haven’t considered, but I think the previous is a better — and better faith — point of departure when formulating any serious commentary on the golf equipment world than some of the more cynical and conspiratorial takes I hear.

Agree? Disagree? Think I’m worthy of an Adam Hadwin-esque security guard tackle? Let me know in the comments.

@golfoncbs The infamous Adam Hadwin tackle ? #golf #fyp #canada #pgatour #adamhadwin ? Ghibli-style nostalgic waltz – MaSssuguMusic

Continue Reading

Podcasts

Fore Love of Golf: Introducing a new club concept

Published

on

Episode #16 brings us Cliff McKinney. Cliff is the founder of Old Charlie Golf Club, a new club, and concept, to be built in the Florida panhandle. The model is quite interesting and aims to make great, private golf more affordable. We hope you enjoy the show!

Continue Reading

Opinion & Analysis

On Scottie Scheffler wondering ‘What’s the point of winning?’

Published

on

Last week, I came across a reel from BBC Sport on Instagram featuring Scottie Scheffler speaking to the media ahead of The Open at Royal Portrush. In it, he shared that he often wonders what the point is of wanting to win tournaments so badly — especially when he knows, deep down, that it doesn’t lead to a truly fulfilling life.

 

View this post on Instagram

 

A post shared by BBC SPORT (@bbcsport)

“Is it great to be able to win tournaments and to accomplish the things I have in the game of golf? Yeah, it brings tears to my eyes just to think about it because I’ve literally worked my entire life to be good at this sport,” Scheffler said. “To have that kind of sense of accomplishment, I think, is a pretty cool feeling. To get to live out your dreams is very special, but at the end of the day, I’m not out here to inspire the next generation of golfers. I’m not out here to inspire someone to be the best player in the world, because what’s the point?”

Ironically — or perhaps perfectly — he went on to win the claret jug.

That question — what’s the point of winning? — cuts straight to the heart of the human journey.

As someone who’s spent over two decades in the trenches of professional golf, and in deep study of the mental, emotional, and spiritual dimensions of the game, I see Scottie’s inner conflict as a sign of soul evolution in motion.

I came to golf late. I wasn’t a junior standout or college All-American. At 27, I left a steady corporate job to see if I could be on the PGA Tour starting as a 14-handicap, average-length hitter. Over the years, my journey has been defined less by trophies and more by the relentless effort to navigate the deeply inequitable and gated system of professional golf — an effort that ultimately turned inward and helped me evolve as both a golfer and a person.

One perspective that helped me make sense of this inner dissonance around competition and our culture’s tendency to overvalue winning is the idea of soul evolution.

The University of Virginia’s Division of Perceptual Studies has done extensive research on reincarnation, and Netflix’s Surviving Death (Episode 6) explores the topic, too. Whether you take it literally or metaphorically, the idea that we’re on a long arc of growth — from beginner to sage elder — offers a profound perspective.

If you accept the premise literally, then terms like “young soul” and “old soul” start to hold meaning. However, even if we set the word “soul” aside, it’s easy to see that different levels of life experience produce different worldviews.

Newer souls — or people in earlier stages of their development — may be curious and kind but still lack discernment or depth. There is a naivety, and they don’t yet question as deeply, tending to see things in black and white, partly because certainty feels safer than confronting the unknown.

As we gain more experience, we begin to experiment. We test limits. We chase extreme external goals — sometimes at the expense of health, relationships, or inner peace — still operating from hunger, ambition, and the fragility of the ego.

It’s a necessary stage, but often a turbulent and unfulfilling one.

David Duval fell off the map after reaching World No. 1. Bubba Watson had his own “Is this it?” moment with his caddie, Ted Scott, after winning the Masters.

In Aaron Rodgers: Enigma, reflecting on his 2011 Super Bowl win, Rodgers said:

“Now I’ve accomplished the only thing that I really, really wanted to do in my life. Now what? I was like, ‘Did I aim at the wrong thing? Did I spend too much time thinking about stuff that ultimately doesn’t give you true happiness?’”

Jim Carrey once said, “I think everybody should get rich and famous and do everything they ever dreamed of so they can see that it’s not the answer.”

Eventually, though, something shifts.

We begin to see in shades of gray. Winning, dominating, accumulating—these pursuits lose their shine. The rewards feel more fleeting. Living in a constant state of fight-or-flight makes us feel alive, yes, but not happy and joyful.

Compassion begins to replace ambition. Love, presence, and gratitude become more fulfilling than status, profits, or trophies. We crave balance over burnout. Collaboration over competition. Meaning over metrics.

Interestingly, if we zoom out, we can apply this same model to nations and cultures. Countries, like people, have a collective “soul stage” made up of the individuals within them.

Take the United States, for example. I’d place it as a mid-level soul: highly competitive and deeply driven, but still learning emotional maturity. Still uncomfortable with nuance. Still believing that more is always better. Despite its global wins, the U.S. currently ranks just 23rd in happiness (as of 2025). You might liken it to a gifted teenager—bold, eager, and ambitious, but angsty and still figuring out how to live well and in balance. As much as a parent wants to protect their child, sometimes the child has to make their own mistakes to truly grow.

So when Scottie Scheffler wonders what the point of winning is, I don’t see someone losing strength.

I see someone evolving.

He’s beginning to look beyond the leaderboard. Beyond metrics of success that carry a lower vibration. And yet, in a poetic twist, Scheffler did go on to win The Open. But that only reinforces the point: even at the pinnacle, the question remains. And if more of us in the golf and sports world — and in U.S. culture at large — started asking similar questions, we might discover that the more meaningful trophy isn’t about accumulating or beating others at all costs.

It’s about awakening and evolving to something more than winning could ever promise.

Continue Reading

WITB

Facebook

Trending