Could 1975 Jack Nicklaus break par on today's Masters course? A mathematical answer to an impossible question

Comparing golfers of different eras, even on an iconically consistent layout like Augusta National, is usually like trying to predict how a toddler might react to seeing the Easter Bunny for the first time, rife with conjecture and suppositions that cannot be verified in any way that might be considered scientific.

So what? We think we have an idea that offers a chilling approximation of what might happen with golfers of different eras competing at the Masters. At the very least, we think it will be a lovely argument conversation starter for your next rain delay, largely because our research suggests that vintage 1970s Jack Nicklaus time traveling to the Augusta National of today, original gear in tow, would not break par.

What the what?

Calm down. We know the greatest player in golf’s recorded history would find a way to get the ball in the hole in less than the stipulated number of strokes on a golf course where he won six green jackets. But when you study what’s happened to Augusta National since Nicklaus’s greatest years, like the 1975 Masters some half a century ago, for example, it is not too much of a stretch to suggest that a teleported Golden Bear might find the current Augusta National a bit of a bear itself. Our data says a 1975 Jack Nicklaus would probably be shooting 74 or 75, or about four strokes higher than his average for the entire decade of the 1970s.

Our methodology, founded in extensive analysis of historical strokes gained data both on the PGA Tour in general and the Masters specifically, is admittedly a little kooky. Rather than guessing what the half-a-century-ago Nicklaus might do with the current hot drivers and hotter balls, our experiment posits what Nicklaus would have done had he time traveled from 1975 with his 1975 clubs and ball, white pants and flyaway collar shirts not necessarily excepted. The intent isn’t to mock 1970s technology or Jack’s biomechanical deficiencies or Whoop!-lessness. Rather, by showing where Nicklaus was with his game and equipment at Augusta National in 1975 and thrust that precisely forward to today, we’re attempting to paint a clearer picture of how much the game has changed, how much ball and club technology has made golf (and golfers) at the elite level fundamentally different, and why iconic Augusta National has done all it can to resist those changes in both man and his machines.

What our work attempts to do is show first how 1975 Jack Nicklaus’s game would fare on the current layout. That means using a combination of elements that show comparatively what Nicklaus might do given not only his 30-yard shorter driving distance, but how that would almost necessarily lead to further deleterious effects on his score on each hole. We use the statistical idea of average “strokes to get down” from various distances, based on current PGA Tour data and actual full-field performance data from the 2019-21 Masters from different yardages into all the holes. The Masters data is especially valuable because there were several older former champions whose driving distance was similar to Jack Nicklaus’s driving distance in 1975. Bernhard Langer in 2019 would be one example, so the way the then 61-year-old Langer played the course that year is instructive for predicting how a time-traveling Nicklaus might play it with persimmon and steel and muscleback blades and balata.

In that same way, we also have put together a scenario where World No. 1 and twice Masters champion Scottie Scheffler time travels. First, he takes his current game and gear back to 1975’s Augusta National layout, which featured a scorecard that did not crack the 7,000-yard barrier. It is no great leap to sense that Scheffler would have a lot of wedges into the greens, and that his ultimate score was going to be better than Nicklaus’s average of 69 in 1975.

Then, because we find ourselves neck deep in the ongoing debate over how a ball rollback might affect performance, we also wondered if there was a way to project what Scheffler might shoot at Augusta National were he to lose the 15 yards off the tee that’s been projected by the USGA and R&A as the ball rollback’s ultimate effect. While it does not take us back to Nicklausian persimmon and balata, it once again shows that clubs and balls, at least as much as the humans who use them, determine how Augusta National plays.

While decidedly unknowable, were his 1975 self to step onto the now some 600 yards longer 2025 Augusta National layout what Jack might have said seems reminiscent of what the legendary Bobby Jones said of Nicklaus the first time he saw him: “a game with which I am not familiar.” What Nicklaus would see is how the average par-4 now is more than 40 yards longer than in the 1970s. He would find himself with long irons, fairway woods or even frankly no club that he could approach successfully any of the current par-4s and par-5s. Nicklaus’ average drive at the time was in the 265-275-yard range, this based on PGA Tour stats from 1980, the year Nicklaus won two majors. That was a great number back then but now it would be 30 yards short of the PGA Tour average and wouldn’t even register among the 183 players ranked in average driving distance. That kind of tee ball would leave him with an average approach shot (including par 5s) of some 210 yards, or what Nicklaus estimated his 2-iron distance to be in his epic 1970s era instruction book Golf My Way.

As good a long iron player as Nicklaus was (his 1-iron to the 15th green in 1975’s final round is a masterpiece all to itself), even he admitted that his approach game with fairway woods rated maybe “65 percent” because he wasn’t called on to use them that much and rarely chose to practice those shots. At the current Augusta National he might even then be further up against it, having to rely on one of the worst parts of his game: chipping, pitching and bunker play, which Nicklaus sometimes characterized as “50 percent.” Fact is, nobody is hitting a lot of greens at Augusta National with 1970s era irons and woods, not from 210 yards out.

So what would the ultimate effect on scoring be if 1975 Nicklaus found himself suddenly striding the fairways of 2025 Augusta National? While Nicklaus might only shoot in the mid-70s it seems obvious that the holes that have changed the most in the last 50 years would severely affect his score. For instance:

—On the first hole, which is now 45 yards longer, 1975 Nicklaus would barely reach the crest of the hill and the edge of the right-hand bunkers, which would require at least a 270-yard drive uphill. His 175-185 yard approach shot, as opposed to the 130-140 yards would lead to a predicted score nearly a quarter of a stroke higher (4.21 instead of the 3.99 we would expect in 1975).

—On the fifth and seventh holes, which are 60 and 90 yards longer today than in 1975, Nicklaus likely would have approach shots in 180-225-yard range. Prediction: No. 5: 4.24 in 2025 vs. 4.0 in 1975; No. 7: 4.32 vs. 3.90 in 1975 (when he had about 95 yards in).

—On the uphill closing hole, now 45 yards longer, the bunkers wouldn’t even be in play for 1975 Jack Nicklaus, requiring nearly a 300-yard uphill shot to reach them. While he would have had barely 150 yards in 50 years ago, that number might balloon to nearly 200 yards in 2025. Prediction: 4.30 or about a third of a stroke higher than how he would be expected to play it on the 1970s layout.

—On the par-5 15th hole that famous Nicklaus 1-iron might barely reach the pond in front of the green, given that he’d be at least 280 yards from the hole. Prediction: 4.73, still under par but not like our predicted score for Nicklaus of 4.58 for the 1975 version of the 15th hole.

Because this enterprise is a bit fanciful, it’s hard to know how much Nicklaus’s relative lack of distance might penalize him for certain in terms of his actual score. In other words, being 30 yards shorter on the first hole could mean Nicklaus’s approach shot would be blind. The same on the 11th hole, and he would likely be so far back on the fifth and seventh holes that there isn’t even representative data that might provide a reasonable guess for a likely score, given the severity of those greens.

So even with a projected score of 74.54, the wise choice for a betting man might be to take the over. But even if Augusta National really has become four strokes harder over the last half century for the greatest player who ever lived, it’s even more of a revelation to wonder how much easier the Augusta National of 50 years ago would play for the greatest player of the current moment. Or, more accurately, how much players and the equipment might have obliterated the course had it not embarked on the expansion efforts it started in the early 2000s. The lengthening of the course over the last two decades wasn’t about Tiger-proofing Augusta National, as it was called in the wake of Woods’ record-setting 1997 victory and subsequent ascension to power. Rather, it was an acknowledgement of what Woods and equipment innovation was going to bring over the next generation, not just for him but for the generation of players he inspired. Had Augusta National not changed, it would likely have become a caricature of itself. And we have some numbers to prove it.

A mismatch for the ages

In our scenario, using Scottie Scheffler’s statistical profile, we would expect a time-traveling Scheffler and his full bag of modern clubs and ball and his current fitness regimen and overall swing development knowledge to boot, to blitz through the course in around 68 strokes, often less. That’s nearly two-and-a-half strokes better than his scoring average on the current layout. Given that on eight of the 10 par 4s his approach shots would be 135 yards or less, it’s not even all that far-fetched to suggest that Scheffler could reasonably shoot 66 a meaningful percentage of the time on the then 6,967-yard layout. The only par-5 that might pose a distance challenge would be the uphill eighth, where he might have a 4-iron approach. Our strokes-to-get-down data expects Scheffler to score better than par on every hole other than the par-3s.

The way we imagine Scheffer playing the course seems not unlike the way Tiger Woods played it in 1997. That year on a layout relatively similar to the one Nicklaus played in 1975, the longest club Woods had into a par-4 was an 8-iron. The longest distance we think Scheffler might have faced for a par-4 approach shot in a time-traveled round back to the 1975 Augusta National would have been about 175 yards on the 10th hole, also probably a hard 8-iron. Woods’ then-record 18-under score for four rounds would be well within what we expect Scheffler could shoot for 72 holes.

While it’s probably hardly a surprise that a great player of today would score much better on the Augusta National of yesterday and a great player of the 1970s would struggle on the Augusta National of today, it seems more instructive to picture just how much of an effect time has had on the players and the equipment. It puts the two eras in stark contrast when we say that Scheffler would be expected to be more than six strokes better than Nicklaus when each played the other’s Augusta National.

A looming correction

All of this time-traveling discussion seems particularly compelling with the USGA and R&A about to implement a ball rollback that seemingly has the intent to not only revert equipment performance but essentially roll back time, as well. Fortunately, we also can imagine what that effect might be through the strokes-to-get-down metric. The ball rollback is estimated by the ruling bodies to take about 15 yards off the driving distance of top players. So if we turn Scheffler’s 300-yard driving distance average to 285, what might the effect be on his score? While Scheffler’s current scoring average at the Masters is 70.4 (exactly what Nicklaus’s was in the 1970s, by the way), our estimate of how that number would change with a ball rollback shows a projected score for Scheffler of 72.79. The best players might shoot scores lower than that, but it is interesting that the actual scoring average for the last five Masters (72.85) is not all that different from that number.

Does this constitute a successful recalibration of the game, or does it remind us more of the early 2000s when some of the Masters usual fireworks were so dulled that Augusta National’s risk-reward style of golf rarely seemed worth it? Is the thrill still there when the No. 1 player in the world has 285 to reach the 8th or 265 to reach the 15th? Perhaps not, but we also know that it will be easier at Augusta National to move up a tee than to once again somehow find room for a tee farther back. The fact is, with a rollback, a player like Scheffler would have an average approach shot about 20 yards longer than what Nicklaus had in 1975, a difference that given how much stronger iron lofts are today suggests players of the post-rollback era might be hitting a similar numbered iron as those from a lifetime ago. In other words, the changes to Augusta National have in fact resulted in the same kinds of demands on elite players today that were present 50 years ago. Indeed if you look at the strokes-to-get-down estimates for Jack Nicklaus in 1975 and Scottie Scheffler in 2025 they are nearly identical. Nicklaus’s projected score for 1975 was 70.56, Scheffler’s for 2025 is 70.59.

And if there is an assessment of whether the rollback matters or is necessary, that might just be it. Because when we come to Augusta National for the Masters, we come to revel in the way the present embraces and is inspired by the past. These numbers show that were the present and past to intersect, they would be unrecognizable to the other. A rollback can’t take us back to 1975—the athletes are not going to revert and the efficiency of swing training will only increase. And the rollback actually could make Augusta National play as difficult as it did in the early years after it was lengthened. But that brutishness has gone away in time to where the greatness of a Scheffler stands out not dissimilar to the way Nicklaus’s did. Embracing the rollback is a way of making the Masters as relevant tomorrow as it was yesterday. What these numbers suggest about the Masters current and future state is how a rollback eventually might show us something we, the game and the echoes of Augusta National would find as familiar as a green jacket.