Connect with us

Opinion & Analysis

Gleneagles Scouting Report: Who does the course favor?

Published

on

It’s that time of year (or two) again where national (or continental) pride is on the line, and the Americans desperately search for a method to trounce their European overlords.

For the 2014 affair in Scotland, the site is the Gleneagles PGA Centenary Course. The 21-year-old layout has hosted plenty on the European Tour—including the Johnnie Walker Championship since 1999.

Gleneagles remains a bit of a mystery though, especially to American fans. Which players does the course favor? And, more importantly, which team is advantaged most by the layout?

We’ll answer below, but first we must outline the course itself.

Gleneagles: A Parkland Ball-Striker’s Paradise

This Perthshire layout was first designed by Jack Nicklaus in 1993 and much maligned by critics—particularly Lee Westwood—in the years thereafter.

Nicklaus was asked to redesign the layout in 2010 and that project commenced in October the next year, with the course re-opening under its makeover in April 2012. It will play as a par-72, measuring 7,262 yards for the event, making it the shortest layout to host the Ryder Cup in a decade.

Gleneagles may be in Scotland but is NOT a links course, as Golf Digest’s John Huggan surmised in his course preview.

This is a parkland track through and through. The course is green, lush and soft. The fairways are in immaculate, spongy form and the bunkers—both fairway and greenside—are of the American-dominated shallower variety.

And despite being a European Tour mainstay, the course hasn’t been traversed too much in competition by the home team. Golfweek’s Allistar Tait posits that only a quarter of the European squad can be considered Gleneagles experts.

As for the event’s dramatics, a few signature holes stick out at Gleneagles. The first is No. 5, a daunting 461-yard par-four players rave about for its beauty and unbelievably intimidating tee shot. This brute could sway matches early. The back-nine equivalent is No. 15, a 463-yard par four that is probably the toughest hole over the final nine, as it challenges a player at every juncture. The late matches could hinge on who is gobbled up by this monster.

The 18th hole though offers the most theatrics. The closing hole is an eminently reachable 513-yard par-five plastered into an amphitheater setting. The dramatization of this ending number was a large duty of Nicklaus’ re-design, and he seems to have succeeded here.

Now onto the most important inquiry: What kind of golfer succeeds most at Gleneagles?

Segmenting into the specific parts of the game, driving is important at Gleneagles, but not overly so. European Captain Paul McGinley has set up the rough to be a little thicker than usual, but we’re not talking U.S. Open style stuff here. The fairways at Gleneagles are generally pretty wide, and there are four par-fives (and maybe a driveable par-four). You want some modicum of accuracy at Gleneagles, but the long-hitters will be able wail it into some part of these generous fairways on most occasions. Bombers with some directional control off the tee profile well here.

Really though, Gleneagles is an approach-shot golf course. Nicklaus has stated so, and a flyover corroborates his verdict. The greens aren’t necessarily small, but many qualify as shallow, narrow, multi-tiered or some combination of the trio. Such characteristics require players to be quite on point with their approaches unless they want to find themselves on the wrong part of the surface or miss the green all together.

One aspect of the redesign was the implementation of numerous greenside run-offs and swales. This addition, along with the thickened greenside rough, should allow the short game to be more of a factor than usual, but nothing on the level of approach play’s paramount position.

The only part of the game that will be largely unimportant is putting. Some surfaces are decently undulated, yet these greens mostly offer slow, straightforward putts. This serves to minimize the difference between good and bad putters.

The Players who Benefit from Gleneagles

If we’re going to construct the perfect golfer for Gleneagles, a player whose strengths are exaggerated and weaknesses hidden by the layout’s design, we come to these four points:

  • The golfer must be an excellent approach player; this is by far the most salient trait.
  • He must possess impressive length off the tee and not completely disregard accuracy.
  • His short game must be in good shape.
  • And his flatstick must be mediocre or an outright nuisance, as this course does its best to protect poor putters.

Perusing through the 24 competitors at Gleneagles, only two names nail all four criteria: Justin Rose and Stephen Gallacher.

There may not be a better course in the world for Rose’s skill set. The Englishman has been one of the game’s premier iron players the last few years and was touted the top competitor in that category in 2013.  The course is massively adept toward approach shots from 175-225 yards, a range Rose just happens to absolutely obliterate. His approach play has regressed in 2014, but he’s still top five in the game in that aspect.

Rose also possesses a deceptive amount of power off the tee (top-30 to top-50 stuff) and combines it with enviable accuracy (28th and 52nd on Tour in 2012 and 2013) for an excellent driving performance. He’s a sneaky good short game player—two top-five finishes in the PGA Tour’s Proximity to Hole (Around the Green) stat in the last three years. The man’s only flaw is his flatstick, with three finishes outside the top 100 in Strokes Gained: Putting from 2012-2014. But again, Gleneagles helps cover that up.

As for Gallacher, his resume isn’t as down-the-board perfect for Gleneagles as Rose’s, but it does fit all four criteria. The Scot is one of the European Tour’s signature approach players, and while his driving accuracy is actually below average, the fact that he has some at all is what’s important when combined with his great length. We know Gallacher is a dreadful putter because it’s been widely believed that’s what has held him back. As for the short game, the 38-year-old finished 66th and 65th on the European Tour in scrambling in 2013 and 2014–above average marks produced despite the significant negative skewing in the statistic courtesy of Gallacher’s awful flatstick.

But that’s just the tip of things. A player can still be viewed as a good fit for a course even if it doesn’t service every part of his game.

Under this less stringent view, plenty more names qualify for a successful marriage with Gleneagles.

There’s Sergio Garcia, who has been the best approach player on the PGA Tour in 2014 according to Mark Broadie’s calculations. Not only does that scream “I’m great for Gleneagles,” but Garcia retains a significant amount of tee power with some accuracy sprayed in and remains a good (and severely underrated) short game player. The fact that his improvement in putting is still apparent (61st in strokes gained this year) is the only part that keeps him from going 4-for-4.

Much the same goes for Rory McIlroy, except his driving is the game’s best and his approach play is only merely quite good. Henrik Stenson’s good, if overrated, approach play, lengthy and accurate driving, and poor putting all yearn to Gleneagles.

Three on the American side also stick out. Keegan Bradley is long and somewhat accurate, and a good approach and short game player. Bubba Watson shares those first two characteristics with Bradley but his below average flatstick being hidden is the third culprit here.

The final member is Jim Furyk. The 44-year-old ranked second in Strokes Gained: Approach in 2014, which is right in line with his normal legendary iron play, and is still a short game artist for the ages as well. Furyk only qualifies for two categories here (his slightly-above average putting just misses out), but he’s an absolute monster in both.

Overall, eight players, or a third of the field, have highly attractive games for the Gleneagles layout.

Does Gleneagles Favor the U.S. or Europe?

If we’re looking at just the guys posted above, the answer is definitely Europe. Of these select eight, five are Europeans and the only two who qualify as perfect matches for Gleneagles also represent the home squad.

Of course the European team on average has better players, so you would expect them to possess more and higher quality fits for Gleneagles. Yet even adjusting for this, Gleneagles seems to bring out the best in the games of the Europeans more than the Americans—regardless of talent.

But this isn’t a complete picture. There are 16 golfers that matter here not yet mentioned in the equation. Maybe Gleneagles offers the Europeans more and better fits for the layout, but what if their poor course matches are more pervasive and damaging? You can’t just evaluate the good in such enterprises, every part of the spectrum must be examined.

In that regard, I put the players into five “course fit” categories. The first two, “Perfect Fit” and “Solid Fit,” are expounded upon above. The remaining three are “Borderline Fit” (possess some good qualities for Gleneagles but not enough to really be enthralled by the course), “Not a Fit” (bad qualities, aka diluting of strengths or exposing of weaknesses, just as prevalent as good ones) and “Poor Fit” (bad qualities for Gleneagles more detrimental than good ones).

Here’s where I put the remaining 16.

Borderline Fit: Martin Kaymer, Phil Mickelson, Webb Simpson, Rickie Fowler, Jamie Donaldson, Victor Dubuisson, Hunter Mahan, Matt Kuchar

Not a Fit: Thomas Bjorn, Graeme McDowell, Zach Johnson

Poor Fit: Patrick Reed, Ian Poulter, Jimmy Walker, Lee Westwood, Jordan Spieth

Five Americans and three Europeans are borderline fits, one American and two Europeans are not fits and three Americans and two Euros are poor fits.

All in all, the totals for Europe are: 2 perfect fits, 3 sold fits, 3 borderline fits, 2 not a fit and 2 poor fits. The United States comes in at 0 perfect fits, 3 solid fits, 5 borderline fits, 1 not a fit and 3 poor fits.

What can we conclude?

Gleneagles still plays to the Europeans’ advantage. As mentioned above, even factoring in the sizable (if overblown) talent disparity, Europe is solidly better in the top two categories.

The U.S. needed to stem the tides by a significant amount on the other three to claim victory here, and that didn’t happen. They gained a little ground overall, but having three poor fits to Europe’s two dissolved any chance that Gleneagles would profile better for the Americans.

So if it wasn’t tough enough for the underdog Americans, less talented and on the road, they also have to compete on a course that caters more to the Europeans.

Good luck, fellas. You’re going to need it.

TV Times for the Ryder Cup

Thursday, Sept. 25

9 a.m. – 1 p.m. (Golf Channel)

Friday, Sept. 26

Session 1 (Four-ball): 2:35 a.m. (Golf Channel)
Session 2 (Foursomes): 8:15 a.m. (Golf Channel)

Saturday, Sept. 27

Session 1 (Four-ball): 3 a.m. (NBC)
Session 2 (Foursomes): 8:15 a.m. (NBC)

Sunday, Sept. 28

Singles: 6:36 a.m. (NBC)

Your Reaction?
  • 0
  • LEGIT0
  • WOW0
  • LOL0
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP0
  • OB0
  • SHANK0

Kevin's fascination with the game goes back as long as he can remember. He has written about the sport on the junior, college and professional levels and hopes to cover its proceedings in some capacity for as long as possible. His main area of expertise is the PGA Tour, which is his primary focus for GolfWRX. Kevin is currently a student at Northwestern University, but he will be out into the workforce soon enough. You can find his golf tidbits and other sports-related babble on Twitter @KevinCasey19. GolfWRX Writer of the Month: September 2014

10 Comments

10 Comments

  1. JK

    Sep 24, 2014 at 3:43 pm

    USA! USA! USA!
    \
    \
    \

    hahaha j/k

  2. AJ

    Sep 24, 2014 at 9:32 am

    Decent enough article but the headline is very misleading. Clearly a ‘scouting report’ suggests the author has actually visited the site.

    I like that you include linked references to your articles, albeit having as many as ten at a time is a bit tiresome. You feel as a reader you are not getting the ‘full story’ if you don’t click through to every external link.

    Just my opinion!

  3. Rich

    Sep 23, 2014 at 7:55 pm

    I don’t care what anyone says, a good putter is always better than a bad putter, even on a course that apparently protects bad putters. This analysis makes no sense at all.

  4. Rep

    Sep 23, 2014 at 12:35 pm

    I think it’s even. You can scramble fairly comfortably on this course, and you don’t necessarily have to be good at pitching or chipping, you can roll it and get away with it, the greens are so huge, there’s room to get away with some bad shots. Distance control on the putts is the biggest factor.

  5. dot dot

    Sep 23, 2014 at 11:31 am

    As every tournament course does each time it will favor the golfer who is playing the best that week.

  6. Jafar

    Sep 23, 2014 at 10:22 am

    Nice, I like the final analysis. It will be interesting to see how it plays out this weekend.

    I wonder if Jim Furyk or Chris Kirk would have fit better.

  7. imakaveli

    Sep 23, 2014 at 10:21 am

    Thomas Bjorn won at Gleneagles in 2011 🙂

    • Rep

      Sep 23, 2014 at 12:38 pm

      Exactly. What an idiotic analysis

      • Kevin Casey

        Sep 23, 2014 at 1:11 pm

        Yep, he did win at Gleneagles in 2011. Winning at a certain course does not imply that said layout is conducive to a player’s game. A player could simply happen to be in massively good form that week, in such great shape with his game that he can overcome a course that is a poor suit for his talents.

        If Bjorn had won at Gleneagles two or three times in recent years, or had a couple of very high finishes, it would be tough to put him as a non-fit. After all, it’s pretty unlikely that Bjorn would just happen to enter the same tournament in some of the best form of his life (which he would have to be in order to win at an event where the course is a poor fit) in short succession.

        But that’s not the case. In his past five starts at Gleneagles, Bjorn has the win, a T10 and three missed cuts. Besides the victory, that’s a very shoddy record. Speaks to the fact that more than likely that Gleneagles victory was the product of fluky incredible form, not a course fit.

Leave a Reply

Cancel 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.

19th Hole

Vincenzi’s 2024 Zurich Classic of New Orleans betting preview

Published

on

The PGA TOUR heads to New Orleans to play the 2023 Zurich Classic of New Orleans. In a welcome change from the usual stroke play, the Zurich Classic is a team event. On Thursday and Saturday, the teams play best ball, and on Friday and Sunday the teams play alternate shot.

TPC Louisiana is a par 72 that measures 7,425 yards. The course features some short par 4s and plenty of water and bunkers, which makes for a lot of exciting risk/reward scenarios for competitors. Pete Dye designed the course in 2004 specifically for the Zurich Classic, although the event didn’t make its debut until 2007 because of Hurricane Katrina.

Coming off of the Masters and a signature event in consecutive weeks, the field this week is a step down, and understandably so. Many of the world’s top players will be using this time to rest after a busy stretch.

However, there are some interesting teams this season with some stars making surprise appearances in the team event. Some notable teams include Patrick Cantlay and Xander Schauffele, Rory McIlroy and Shane Lowry, Collin Morikawa and Kurt Kitayama, Will Zalatoris and Sahith Theegala as well as a few Canadian teams, Nick Taylor and Adam Hadwin and Taylor Pendrith and Corey Conners.

Past Winners at TPC Louisiana

  • 2023: Riley/Hardy (-30)
  • 2022: Cantlay/Schauffele (-29)
  • 2021: Leishman/Smith (-20)
  • 2019: Palmer/Rahm (-26)
  • 2018: Horschel/Piercy (-22)
  • 2017: Blixt/Smith (-27)

2024 Zurich Classic of New Orleans Picks

Tom Hoge/Maverick McNealy +2500 (DraftKings)

Tom Hoge is coming off of a solid T18 finish at the RBC Heritage and finished T13 at last year’s Zurich Classic alongside Harris English.

This season, Hoge is having one of his best years on Tour in terms of Strokes Gained: Approach. In his last 24 rounds, the only player to top him on the category is Scottie Scheffler. Hoge has been solid on Pete Dye designs, ranking 28th in the field over his past 36 rounds.

McNealy is also having a solid season. He’s finished T6 at the Waste Management Phoenix Open and T9 at the PLAYERS Championship. He recently started working with world renowned swing coach, Butch Harmon, and its seemingly paid dividends in 2024.

Keith Mitchell/Joel Dahmen +4000 (DraftKings)

Keith Mitchell is having a fantastic season, finishing in the top-20 of five of his past seven starts on Tour. Most recently, Mitchell finished T14 at the Valero Texas Open and gained a whopping 6.0 strokes off the tee. He finished 6th at last year’s Zurich Classic.

Joel Dahmen is having a resurgent year and has been dialed in with his irons. He also has a T11 finish at the PLAYERS Championship at TPC Sawgrass which is another Pete Dye track. With Mitchell’s length and Dahmen’s ability to put it close with his short irons, the Mitchell/Dahmen combination will be dangerous this week.

Taylor Moore/Matt NeSmith +6500 (DraftKings)

Taylor Moore has quickly developed into one of the more consistent players on Tour. He’s finished in the top-20 in three of his past four starts, including a very impressive showing at The Masters, finishing T20. He’s also finished T4 at this event in consecutive seasons alongside Matt NeSmith.

NeSmith isn’t having a great 2024, but has seemed to elevate his game in this format. He finished T26 at Pete Dye’s TPC Sawgrass, which gives the 30-year-old something to build off of. NeSmith is also a great putter on Bermudagrass, which could help elevate Moore’s ball striking prowess.

Your Reaction?
  • 6
  • LEGIT3
  • WOW1
  • LOL0
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP3
  • OB1
  • SHANK1

Continue Reading

19th Hole

Vincenzi’s 2024 LIV Adelaide betting preview: Cam Smith ready for big week down under

Published

on

After having four of the top twelve players on the leaderboard at The Masters, LIV Golf is set for their fifth event of the season: LIV Adelaide. 

For both LIV fans and golf fans in Australia, LIV Adelaide is one of the most anticipated events of the year. With 35,000 people expected to attend each day of the tournament, the Grange Golf Club will be crawling with fans who are passionate about the sport of golf. The 12th hole, better known as “the watering hole”, is sure to have the rowdiest of the fans cheering after a long day of drinking some Leishman Lager.  

The Grange Golf Club is a par-72 that measures 6,946 yards. The course features minimal resistance, as golfers went extremely low last season. In 2023, Talor Gooch shot consecutive rounds of 62 on Thursday and Friday, giving himself a gigantic cushion heading into championship Sunday. Things got tight for a while, but in the end, the Oklahoma State product was able to hold off The Crushers’ Anirban Lahiri for a three-shot victory. 

The Four Aces won the team competition with the Range Goats finishing second. 

*All Images Courtesy of LIV Golf*

Past Winners at LIV Adelaide

  • 2023: Talor Gooch (-19)

Stat Leaders Through LIV Miami

Green in Regulation

  1. Richard Bland
  2. Jon Rahm
  3. Paul Casey

Fairways Hit

  1. Abraham Ancer
  2. Graeme McDowell
  3. Henrik Stenson

Driving Distance

  1. Bryson DeChambeau
  2. Joaquin Niemann
  3. Dean Burmester

Putting

  1. Cameron Smith
  2. Louis Oosthuizen
  3. Matt Jones

2024 LIV Adelaide Picks

Cameron Smith +1400 (DraftKings)

When I pulled up the odds for LIV Adelaide, I was more than a little surprised to see multiple golfers listed ahead of Cameron Smith on the betting board. A few starts ago, Cam finished runner-up at LIV Hong Kong, which is a golf course that absolutely suits his eye. Augusta National in another course that Smith could roll out of bed and finish in the top-ten at, and he did so two weeks ago at The Masters, finishing T6.

At Augusta, he gained strokes on the field on approach, off the tee (slightly), and of course, around the green and putting. Smith able to get in the mix at a major championship despite coming into the week feeling under the weather tells me that his game is once again rounding into form.

The Grange Golf Club is another course that undoubtedly suits the Australian. Smith is obviously incredibly comfortable playing in front of the Aussie faithful and has won three Australian PGA Championship’s. The course is very short and will allow Smith to play conservative off the tee, mitigating his most glaring weakness. With birdies available all over the golf course, there’s a chance the event turns into a putting contest, and there’s no one on the planet I’d rather have in one of those than Cam Smith.

Louis Oosthuizen +2200 (DraftKings)

Louis Oosthuizen has simply been one of the best players on LIV in the 2024 seas0n. The South African has finished in the top-10 on the LIV leaderboard in three of his five starts, with his best coming in Jeddah, where he finished T2. Perhaps more impressively, Oosthuizen finished T7 at LIV Miami, which took place at Doral’s “Blue Monster”, an absolutely massive golf course. Given that Louis is on the shorter side in terms of distance off the tee, his ability to play well in Miami shows how dialed he is with the irons this season.

In addition to the LIV finishes, Oosthuizen won back-to-back starts on the DP World Tour in December at the Alfred Dunhill Championship and the Mauritus Open. He also finished runner-up at the end of February in the International Series Oman. The 41-year-old has been one of the most consistent performers of 2024, regardless of tour.

For the season, Louis ranks 4th on LIV in birdies made, T9 in fairways hit and first in putting. He ranks 32nd in driving distance, but that won’t be an issue at this short course. Last season, he finished T11 at the event, but was in decent position going into the final round but fell back after shooting 70 while the rest of the field went low. This season, Oosthuizen comes into the event in peak form, and the course should be a perfect fit for his smooth swing and hot putter this week.

Your Reaction?
  • 12
  • LEGIT3
  • WOW0
  • LOL1
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP1
  • OB1
  • SHANK1

Continue Reading

Opinion & Analysis

The Wedge Guy: What really makes a wedge work? Part 1

Published

on

Of all the clubs in our bags, wedges are almost always the simplest in construction and, therefore, the easiest to analyze what might make one work differently from another if you know what to look for.

Wedges are a lot less mysterious than drivers, of course, as the major brands are working with a lot of “pixie dust” inside these modern marvels. That’s carrying over more to irons now, with so many new models featuring internal multi-material technologies, and almost all of them having a “badge” or insert in the back to allow more complex graphics while hiding the actual distribution of mass.

But when it comes to wedges, most on the market today are still single pieces of molded steel, either cast or forged into that shape. So, if you look closely at where the mass is distributed, it’s pretty clear how that wedge is going to perform.

To start, because of their wider soles, the majority of the mass of almost any wedge is along the bottom third of the clubhead. So, the best wedge shots are always those hit between the 2nd and 5th grooves so that more mass is directly behind that impact. Elite tour professionals practice incessantly to learn to do that consistently, wearing out a spot about the size of a penny right there. If impact moves higher than that, the face is dramatically thinner, so smash factor is compromised significantly, which reduces the overall distance the ball will fly.

Every one of us, tour players included, knows that maddening shot that we feel a bit high on the face and it doesn’t go anywhere, it’s not your fault.

If your wedges show a wear pattern the size of a silver dollar, and centered above the 3rd or 4th groove, you are not getting anywhere near the same performance from shot to shot. Robot testing proves impact even two to three grooves higher in the face can cause distance loss of up to 35 to 55 feet with modern ‘tour design’ wedges.

In addition, as impact moves above the center of mass, the golf club principle of gear effect causes the ball to fly higher with less spin. Think of modern drivers for a minute. The “holy grail” of driving is high launch and low spin, and the driver engineers are pulling out all stops to get the mass as low in the clubhead as possible to optimize this combination.

Where is all the mass in your wedges? Low. So, disregarding the higher lofts, wedges “want” to launch the ball high with low spin – exactly the opposite of what good wedge play requires penetrating ball flight with high spin.

While almost all major brand wedges have begun putting a tiny bit more thickness in the top portion of the clubhead, conventional and modern ‘tour design’ wedges perform pretty much like they always have. Elite players learn to hit those crisp, spinny penetrating wedge shots by spending lots of practice time learning to consistently make contact low in the face.

So, what about grooves and face texture?

Grooves on any club can only do so much, and no one has any material advantage here. The USGA tightly defines what we manufacturers can do with grooves and face texture, and modern manufacturing techniques allow all of us to push those limits ever closer. And we all do. End of story.

Then there’s the topic of bounce and grinds, the most complex and confusing part of the wedge formula. Many top brands offer a complex array of sole configurations, all of them admittedly specialized to a particular kind of lie or turf conditions, and/or a particular divot pattern.

But if you don’t play the same turf all the time, and make the same size divot on every swing, how would you ever figure this out?

The only way is to take any wedge you are considering and play it a few rounds, hitting all the shots you face and observing the results. There’s simply no other way.

So, hopefully this will inspire a lively conversation in our comments section, and I’ll chime in to answer any questions you might have.

And next week, I’ll dive into the rest of the wedge formula. Yes, shafts, grips and specifications are essential, too.

Your Reaction?
  • 32
  • LEGIT7
  • WOW1
  • LOL1
  • IDHT2
  • FLOP3
  • OB1
  • SHANK3

Continue Reading

WITB

Facebook

Trending