Here’s a little tidbit for both of you – a newspaper article from early 1967:
It explains why Jack is having trouble making the 1967 Ryder Cup team, and it notes that one of the tough, tough courses he played that year was Pensacola, where Jack finished 31st, and where Gay Brewer shot a 26-under 262 (an average of 65.5 per round) to win.*
*Brewer’s score was not in the article; you had to use Wikipedia again.
Facts and numbers, try them some time.
You want some FACTS…here are some FACTS!
In 1970, Trevino played 17 tournaments that Nicklaus did not play. The Winner’s scoring average was 273.01* or 68.25 per round
1/11/1970 276 Los Angeles Open
1/18/1970 271 Phoenix Open Invitational
2/15/1970 275 Tucson Open Invitational
2/22/1970 271 San Antonio Open Invitati
3/15/1970 275 Monsanto Open Invitationa
3/29/1970 274 National Airlines Open In
4/5/1970 271 Greater Greensboro Open
4/19/1970 278 Greater New Orleans Open
5/10/1970 282 Houston Champions Interna
5/31/1970 267 Danny Thomas Memphis Clas
6/28/1970 268 Cleveland Open Invitation
8/23/1970 277 Avco Classic
9/7/1970 267 Gr. Hartford Open Invitat
9/27/1970 274 Green Island Open Invitat
12/6/1970 272 Coral Springs Open Invita
12/13/1970 272 Bahama Islands Open
2/8/1970 271.2 (*) Bob Hope Desert Classic (prorated for 4 rounds)
In 1970, Nicklaus played 5 tournaments that Trevino did not play.
The winners scoring average was 277.333 or 68.33 per round.
8/9/1970 276 American Golf Classic
8/2/1970 273 Westchester Classic
6/14/1970 273 Western Open
5/24/1970 275 Atlanta Classic
**4/12/1970 279 Masters Tournament **
11/1/1970 276 Sahara Invitational
Trevino had 67 rounds at Tournaments that Nicklaus did not player, that played easier (going by the winners score) than the courses than Nicklaus played and Trevino did not. Which included the Masters.
Furthermore, in common tournaments, Nicklaus stroke average was 71.13 and Trevino’s average was 71.34.
And BTW…I counted all Pebble Beach, Palm Springs and the British Open in these calculations. Pebble and Palm Springs were unofficial tournaments through 1972 and did not count in Vardon Stroke averages. Trevino played all three, Nicklaus played at Pebble and St Andrews.
YET…Trevino still had a lower stroke average than Nicklaus if you count the three unofficial tournaments. The analysis shows that Trevino played tournaments (and Nicklaus skipped) whose winning scores were significantly less than Tournaments that Nicklaus played and Trevino skipped.
And Chances are pretty good if that for the year 1971, I would come up with similar results.
I think this leads some credence that Trevino tended to play easier courses than Jack did.
==========
Furthermore, Nicklaus’s website does not claim the 1967 scoring average. If Pebble, Hope and the British Open counted towards in the stroke average, Nicklaus had a lower stroke average.
Nicklaus stroke average in those unofficial tournaments was 70.69. Palmer’s was 72.56 and he did not play the British Open.
Palmer scored 291 at Pebble and 362 at Hope.
Nicklaus scored 284 at Pebble and 355 at Hope and 280 at the British Open
===========
And thanks for snippy reply to the Nicklaus 1967 Ryder Cup question. You could have said the 1967 Wiki article explained without the attitude.
Wow, more snippiness. and you cherry pick one tournament out of approximately 300+ tournaments played in his prime and you think you got something.
Based on the difference between 68.33 and 68.25? A whopping 0.08 strokes? And that’s based on the winner’s score, where you are very likely to get one-time wonders and outliers. The field average would be more informative.
At least you gave some actual data, so good on you. But IMO you’re wasting your time, because no matter what the scoring averages are, you’re not going to convince me that it isn’t harder to play 80 rounds a year than 60.
Look, you know that every golfer has courses they like, and courses they don’t like. In his prime, Tiger would always play great at Torrey Pines, and not so great at Riviera, even though TP’s rating and slope is much higher than Riviera’s. At that level, it has more to do with whether it “fits your eye” than what the field average is.
It just stands to reason that the more events you play, the more courses you’re playing that you don’t like, so your average is likely to go up regardless of the difficulty of the course. The fewer events you play, the more likely it is you’re playing a course you like every week.
More specifically, it’s beyond dispute that Jack would have played worse if he played more often, because he said so in several interviews. He needed the time off.
I truly don’t understand you guys. I can’t think of any analogous argument, in any sport, where fans of an old-timer try to do what you are doing.
Jack won a boatload of championships and awards. He’s widely considered the best of all time. Why can’t you be happy with that? Why do you have to try to give him awards he didn’t earn?
My “snippiness” is due to posting right after reading DiFool’s comment about me being blithely and willfully one-sided, because I don’t share his recollections, or something.
Never claimed to be a saint. Sorry it splashed on you.
Considering the difference between Nicklaus and Trevino was 0.11, the 0.08 difference is significant.
I guess that is why his stroke average in 1960’s was virturally the same in the 1960s when he was playing 25-27 events per year as it was in the 1970’s when he was playing 18-20 events per year.
Because your OP starts has denigrating comments about Nicklaus Palmer and Player. You could have made your point without trying to dismiss the accomplishments of those three.
Nicklaus had the lowest stroke average in 1964 and 1965 and probably 1967 if Pebble and Hope had counted towards the calculations. (He did play 80+ rounds in those years).
And I don’t understand why you had to get snippy with your responses. You seemed to be the one with a chip on your shoulder.