This site follows William’s development as a golfer. The aim is to prepare him to compete in major open tournaments over the next few years, using his tournament results and shot data to decide what to work on.
+2.4Current handicap.
281Tied 1st, Boys 16 Years, Jack Newton International Junior Classic, October 2026.
65Final round at Cypress Lakes, six under par.
March 2028He turns 18. This plan runs to that date and beyond.
The mission
William is 16 and already competing at the top of his age group. The next step is the open game, against fields that include the best amateurs of any age.
Getting there is a matter of finding where shots are gained and lost against the players he has to beat, and spending practice time where it counts most. This site keeps that work in one place for William, his coach and his family. In time it will also carry his profile for US college coaches.
How it works
Compete
Play strong fields. Every round adds to the record on the Tournaments page.
Analyse
After each event, compare his scoring hole by hole with the players at the top. The studies are on the Analysis page.
Train
Turn the findings into a short list of priorities and measure them at the next event. That list is on the Development page.
Current priorities
From the October 2026 field study of 156 players at the Jack Newton International Junior Classic.
The second nine, and doubles
All four of his doubles came on the second nine he played. They cost about 4.5 shots over the week against the norm for the top 15.
Mid-irons into par 3s of 160 to 190 m
About 2.7 shots over the week against the top 15.
Wedge approaches on short and mid-length par 4s
About 4.0 shots over the week, partly the same shots as the first item.
Keep the strengths sharp
Par 5 scoring was the best in the field: birdie or better on 11 of 16. Long par 4s and fast starts were also top-group quality.
2026 Jack Newton International Junior Classic · Cypress Lakes · 6–9 October
Will against the field
Every boy in the 15, 16 and 17 Years divisions played the same tees on the same four days. That gives 156 finishers, 630 rounds and 11,340 hole scores to compare. This report looks at what separates the players at the top, and where Will gains and gives back shots against them.
281Tied 9th of 156 in the pooled field. Tied 1st of 52 in the 16s.
65His final round. Allowing for conditions, the second-best round of the week by anyone.
11 of 16Par 5s played in birdie or better, the best rate in the field.
4 doublesAll on the second nine he played, in rounds 2 and 3. Eight shots.
The short version
Doubles on the second nine are the biggest thing between Will and the very top.
Will beat the top-15 average for birdies and for bogeys. He gave it all back in four holes: doubles cost him 8 shots over the week against a top-15 norm of 3.5. That 4.5-shot gap is larger than the two shots that separated him from the top-15 average. All four came on the second nine he played.
Solid as a description of this week. Suggestive as a lasting pattern: on four rounds, about one player in ten shows a fade this size by chance.
For three rounds Will scored like a chaser. The 65 put him in the top group.
After 54 holes he was on 216, 29th in the pooled field and nearly seven shots behind the eventual top-15 average of 209.4. Allowing for how much a single round can swing, the model puts his level for the week 10th of 156: inside the top group, at its lower edge.
Solid
The top 15 beat the chasers mainly by dropping fewer shots.
The gap is 2.5 shots a round. About 50% comes from fewer bogeys, 27% from more birdies and 23% from fewer doubles. Further down the field it is doubles that do the damage: 1.7 a round against 0.4 for the top 15.
Solid
Par 5s are Will’s clearest edge, and they are where the top group gains most.
He was 10 under on the par 5s for the week against 7.4 under for the top 15, despite a double on the 14th. Per hole, the top 15 gain about twice as much on the chasers on par 5s (0.22 shots) as on par 3s (0.11).
Solid
He gives shots back with a mid-iron or a wedge in hand.
On the four par 3s between 159 and 190 m he was 5 over against a top-15 average of 2.3 over. On the seven short and mid-length par 4s he was 2 over against 2.0 under, which includes two of the doubles. Those are the clubs he trusts least.
Suggestive Sixteen and twenty-eight holes are small samples.
The field shows no fatigue pattern, and the weather barely moved scores.
Across 156 players there is no drop-off late in a round or late in the week, and no cost to a late finish followed by an early start. The eight day-and-wave combinations all played within 0.8 shots of average. Will’s second-nine fade is his own, not something the field shares.
No effect found
Where Will sits
The three age groups are pooled into one field and split into three groups on 72-hole total: the top 15 (281 or better), the chasers (the next 36, 282 to 295) and the rest of the field (105 players, 296 and up). Will’s 281 sits on the boundary of the top group.
The pooled field156 finishers, grouped in two-shot steps
Top 15 (281 or better)Chasers (282–295)Rest of field (296+)Will
The field is wide. The average finisher shot 303.8, and the model puts the spread in true level at about 4.3 shots a round between players, with a further 3.6 shots of round-to-round swing for any one player. That second number matters for everything below: one round, good or bad, says little by itself.
Will’s four cards
Round
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Out
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
In
Total
Par
5
4
3
4
3
5
4
4
4
36
4
3
3
4
5
3
5
4
4
35
71
R1off 10
5
4
4
4
4
4
4
5
4
38
4
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
34
72
R2off 1
4
3
3
4
3
5
3
4
4
33
4
3
3
4
7
2
5
4
6
38
71
R3off 1
4
4
4
5
3
3
4
3
4
34
6
3
5
4
4
4
5
4
4
39
73
R4off 1
4
4
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
33
3
3
3
5
4
2
4
4
4
32
65
3 eagle3 birdie5 bogey6 double bogey the second nine he played that day
Throughout, shots gained means shots better than the average finisher on the same hole, on the same day, in the same tee-time wave. It lets rounds played in different conditions be compared fairly.
What separates the groups
Scoring mixHoles per round
Top 15 (281 or better)Chasers (282–295)Rest of field (296+)Will
Show the numbers
Top 15
Chasers
Rest of field
Will
Birdies or better (per round)
4.17
3.65
2.14
4.50
Bogeys (per round)
2.30
3.57
5.28
2.00
Doubles or worse (per round)
0.40
0.66
1.73
1.00
Birdies do not separate the top 15 from the chasers by much: 4.2 a round against 3.6. Bogeys do: 2.3 against 3.6. Will made more birdies than the top-15 average and fewer bogeys than all but four players in the field. His doubles are the outlier, at one a round.
Shots per round behind the top 15
Total
From fewer birdies
From more bogeys
From doubles or worse
Chasers
+2.53
+0.68
+1.27
+0.59
Rest of field
+8.38
+2.23
+2.98
+3.19
Will
+0.53
−0.30
−0.30
+1.13
A positive number is shots lost to the top 15. Will’s row reads: 0.3 gained through birdies, 0.3 gained through fewer bogeys, 1.1 lost through doubles.
Had his four doubles been bogeys he would have shot 277, which would have won the 16s by four and placed 5th in the pooled field.
Hole type and length
Where each group gainsPer hole played, by type of hole
Top 15 (281 or better)Chasers (282–295)Rest of field (296+)Will
Show the numbers
Top 15
Chasers
Rest of field
Will
Par 3s (5 holes, 123–190 m)
+0.28
+0.17
−0.10
+0.21
Short par 4s (3 holes, 303–322 m)
+0.36
+0.20
−0.11
+0.25
Mid par 4s (4 holes, 337–369 m)
+0.36
+0.20
−0.12
+0.21
Long par 4s (2 holes, 382–383 m)
+0.24
+0.28
−0.13
+0.41
Par 5s (4 holes, 428–559 m)
+0.47
+0.25
−0.15
+0.65
The top 15 pull away from the chasers on the scoring holes. The per-hole gap is 0.22 on par 5s, 0.16 on mid-length par 4s and 0.16 on short par 4s. On the two long par 4s there is no gap at all (−0.03). At this level the long holes are a matter of not losing ground; the tournament is decided on the holes that offer a birdie.
Will’s profile is the mirror image of his trust in his clubs. He is 2nd in the field on par 5s and 14th on the long par 4s, where the driver does the work. He is 34th on short par 4s, 40th on mid-length par 4s and 32nd on par 3s.
Will against the top 15, hole by holeShots over the four rounds. Above the line he gained, below it he gave shots back.
Will gainedWill gave back
Show the numbers
Hole
Par
Metres
Field to par
Top 15 to par
Rest of field to par
Doubles or worse, field
Will’s scores
Will v top 15, week
1
5
428
−0.49
−0.90
−0.36
3%
5 4 4 4
−0.6
2
4
369
+0.14
−0.20
+0.25
4%
4 3 4 4
+0.2
3
3
190
+0.37
+0.12
+0.46
4%
4 3 4 3
−1.5
4
4
383
+0.31
0.00
+0.45
9%
4 4 5 3
0.0
5
3
159
+0.32
+0.08
+0.42
4%
4 3 3 3
−0.7
6
5
491
−0.05
−0.63
+0.11
4%
4 5 3 4
+1.5
7
4
313
+0.03
−0.27
+0.09
2%
4 3 4 4
−0.1
8
4
322
+0.24
+0.02
+0.32
5%
5 4 3 4
+0.1
9
4
382
+0.51
+0.27
+0.66
11%
4 4 4 4
+1.1
10
4
303
+0.45
−0.07
+0.63
12%
4 4 6 3
−1.3
11
3
123
+0.46
+0.22
+0.58
12%
3 3 3 3
+0.9
12
3
170
+0.52
+0.28
+0.58
10%
3 3 5 3
−0.9
13
4
365
+0.41
+0.12
+0.52
10%
4 4 4 5
−0.5
14
5
450
+0.21
−0.17
+0.36
8%
4 7 4 4
+0.3
15
3
174
+0.48
+0.10
+0.58
8%
4 2 4 2
+0.4
16
5
559
+0.32
−0.15
+0.46
10%
4 5 5 4
+1.4
17
4
337
+0.30
−0.15
+0.42
10%
4 4 4 4
−0.6
18
4
352
+0.44
+0.05
+0.57
8%
4 6 4 4
−1.8
Over the four rounds
Will to par
Top 15 average
Will gains (+) or gives back (−)
Par 5s (holes 1, 6, 14, 16)
−10
−7.4
+2.6
Long par 4s (4, 9)
level
+1.1
+1.1
Short par 3 (11, 123 m)
level
+0.9
+0.9
Short par 4s (7, 8, 10)
level
−1.3
−1.3
Mid par 4s (2, 13, 17, 18)
+2
−0.7
−2.7
Mid-iron par 3s (3, 5, 12, 15; 159–190 m)
+5
+2.3
−2.7
All 18 holes
−3
−5.1
−2.1
Two holes deserve a plan of their own. The 10th is the shortest par 4 on the course at 303 m and one of the hardest against par: the field averaged +0.45 with a double or worse 12% of the time, while the top 15 played it in −0.07. Will went 4, 4, 6, 3. The 18th cost him 1.8 shots against the top 15, all from one double.
Length within a par is a weak guide on one course: there are only five par 3s, nine par 4s and four par 5s. The short-par-4 finding rests on nine holes, so treat it as a lead.
Inside the round
Half the field started each round on the 10th, so every hole was played early in the round by some players and late by others. That separates tiredness from the difficulty of the holes.
Early, middle and late holesIn the order played, against each player’s own level
Top 15 (281 or better)Chasers (282–295)Rest of field (296+)Will
Show the numbers
Top 15
Chasers
Rest of field
Will
First six holes (in the order played)
+0.48
+0.29
−0.23
+0.99
Middle six
+0.28
+0.32
−0.16
+0.08
Last six
+0.15
−0.03
+0.09
−0.12
For the field as a whole there is nothing there. The average difference between the second nine played and the first is +0.11 shots, effectively zero. The top 15 and the chasers do their best scoring in the first six holes, and the rest of the field starts slowly and settles, but each of those differences is under half a shot a round.
Will’s first nine against his secondEach round, in the order he played them
First nine playedSecond nine played
The figure at the end of each row is the change from his first nine to his second.
Show the numbers
Round
First nine played
Second nine played
Change
Round 1: 72, started on 10, 11:40AM
+4.3 (holes 10–18, −1 to par)
+0.1 (holes 1–9, +2 to par)
−4.2
Round 2: 71, started on 1, 6:55AM
+4.6 (holes 1–9, −3 to par)
+0.2 (holes 10–18, +3 to par)
−4.4
Round 3: 73, started on 1, 12:00PM
+3.1 (holes 1–9, −2 to par)
0.0 (holes 10–18, +4 to par)
−3.1
Round 4: 65, started on 1, 11:50AM
+4.6 (holes 1–9, −3 to par)
+7.2 (holes 10–18, −3 to par)
+2.7
Will is different. In each of the first three rounds his second nine was three to four shots worse than his first, measured against the field on the same holes. It happened when he started on the 10th in round 1 and when he started on the 1st in rounds 2 and 3, so it follows the order of play, not a particular nine. His first nines were the 4th-best in the field. His second nines were 30th.
In round 4 the pattern reversed: 3 under going out and 3 under coming home for the 65. So he can close. In rounds 1 to 3 he turned under par each time (−1, −3, −2) and came home over par each time (+2, +3, +4).
How much weight to put on this: his average fade of 2.3 shots is the 16th-largest of 156, and a typical player’s figure moves by 1.8 shots from chance alone. So it is a lead to test at the next few events, not a proven trait. It does fit what has been seen in his rounds before: no set reset routine after a bad hole, and a habit of thinking about the score he needs.
The course plays a part in where the doubles fell. Holes 10 to 18 produced a double or worse on 9.8% of plays across the field, against 5.3% for holes 1 to 9. All four of Will’s doubles were on the back nine (10, 12, 14 and 18).
Across the four days
Round by roundShots gained per round
Top 15 (281 or better)Chasers (282–295)Rest of field (296+)Will
Show the numbers
Top 15
Chasers
Rest of field
Will
Round 1 (Tue 6 Oct)
+6.3
+3.8
−2.2
+4.4
Round 2 (Wed 7 Oct)
+6.2
+3.2
−1.9
+4.8
Round 3 (Thu 8 Oct)
+5.5
+4.4
−2.3
+3.1
Round 4 (Fri 9 Oct)
+7.3
+3.8
−2.4
+11.8
No group faded over the week. Comparing rounds 3 and 4 with rounds 1 and 2, the change is +0.2 for the top 15, +0.6 for the chasers and −0.3 for the rest of the field, all within the noise. The final day played about 1.0 shot harder than the first three for everyone, which could be pin positions, pressure, heat or tiredness. This data cannot tell those apart.
Will’s week was three ordinary rounds by his standards and one exceptional one. Rounds 1 to 3 averaged 4.1 shots gained, 26th in the field, which is chaser level. Round 4 gained 11.8.
Conditions-adjusted rounds
Top 15
Chasers
Rest of field
Will
Best round
66.6
68.9
74.6
64.2
Worst round
72.8
75.4
82.1
72.9
Spread (standard deviation)
2.75
2.88
3.37
3.92
Allowing for conditions, his best round was the second-best in the field and his worst was the 10th-best worst round, so both his ceiling and his floor are top-group quality. The spread between his rounds was wider than most (114th of 156 for steadiness), which is the 65 pulling away from the other three.
Weather, tee times and starting hole
Day
Min °C
Max °C
Rain mm, 24 h to 9am next day
9am
3pm
Strongest gust
R1 Tue 6 Oct
12.9
30.2
0.0
20.1°, SSE 7 km/h
28.5°, W 11 km/h
NW 31 km/h at 13:17
R2 Wed 7 Oct
15.1
19.4
0.0
16.7°, SSE 24 km/h
18.5°, SSE 20 km/h
SSE 37 km/h at 06:57
R3 Thu 8 Oct
8.8
23.1
0.0
16.3°, NE 4 km/h
23.0°, WNW 11 km/h
ESE 26 km/h at 15:08
R4 Fri 9 Oct
4.7
29.9
0.4
15.8°, calm
27.6°, NNW 13 km/h
E 37 km/h at 16:11
Observed at Cessnock Airport, a few kilometres from the course. No rain was recorded for the first three days. The 0.4 mm against Friday fell some time before 9am Saturday, and the hourly model shows none during Friday’s playing hours.
The four days were quite different: a hot, still Tuesday; a cool Wednesday with a steady southerly of 20 to 24 km/h, gusting to 37; a mild, calm Thursday; and a Friday that started at 5°C and reached 30°C.
How hard each day and wave playedAfter allowing for who was playing. The bar is the likely range.
Temperature, wind and gusts are hourly model values for the hours each wave was on the course.
Show the numbers
Round and wave
On course
Players
Harder or easier, shots
Likely range
Temp °C
Average wind km/h
Peak gust km/h
R1 Tue morning
6:45-13:45
103
−0.64
−1.2 to 0.0
15–27
6
26
R1 Tue afternoon
11:30-17:30
56
+0.41
−0.4 to +1.2
23–28
9
39
R2 Wed morning
6:45-12:45
56
−0.25
−1.1 to +0.6
14–18
16
46
R2 Wed afternoon
11:30-18:30
103
−0.83
−1.4 to −0.2
14–18
14
42
R3 Thu morning
6:45-13:45
77
−0.07
−0.8 to +0.6
9–21
6
22
R3 Thu afternoon
11:30-18:30
79
+0.08
−0.6 to +0.8
15–22
7
35
R4 Fri morning
6:45-13:45
76
+0.52
−0.2 to +1.2
7–25
4
23
R4 Fri afternoon
11:30-18:30
80
+0.78
+0.1 to +1.5
19–27
9
37
Once the strength of the players in each wave is allowed for, conditions made little difference. All eight combinations sit within 0.8 shots of average and most of the ranges include zero. The windy Wednesday was, if anything, the easiest day. The two warmest afternoons played slightly harder, but not by more than chance would produce.
Morning or afternoon: no reliable difference on any day. The largest gap was on Tuesday, when the afternoon played about a shot harder.
Short turnaround: among morning starters in round 3, those who had finished late the previous evening averaged −0.07 shots against their expected score, and those who had played the previous morning averaged +0.11. No difference.
Starting on the 10th: −0.03 shots against expected score, compared with +0.04 for starting on the 1st. No difference.
Wind and individual players: one windy round cannot show who handles wind well, because any single round swings by 3.6 shots regardless. No group did better or worse in the wind. Will’s 71 that day, off at 6:55am in the strongest gusts, gained 4.8 shots, in line with his rounds 1 and 3.
The practical reading is that this event gives no reason to build preparation around tee times or weather. It would take several more events with a properly windy or wet day to say whether Will gains or loses in bad conditions.
After a mistake
Next hole, against the rest of the same round
Top 15
Chasers
Rest of field
Will
After a bogey or worse
−0.03
−0.02
−0.01
+0.23
After a double or worse
+0.35
+0.10
−0.03
+0.45
After a birdie or better
+0.03
−0.02
0.00
+0.03
Each figure is the next hole compared with the rest of the same round, in shots, so a bad day overall does not count against the player twice. Across the field there is no carry-over: a bogey does not make the next hole worse, in any group.
The same holds for Will. On the 11 holes that followed a dropped shot he played slightly better than in the rest of those rounds. After the 7 on the 14th in round 2 he made a 2 on the 15th. So the hole straight after a mistake is not where his shots went. The issue is the size of the mistake when it comes, and that it came late in the round.
The age groups
Age group
Finishers
Average total
In the top 15
Chasers
Rest of field
Birdies per round
Doubles per round
Boys 15
46
308.5
4
8
34
2.38
1.53
Boys 16
52
303.6
3
17
32
2.79
1.41
Boys 17
58
300.3
8
11
39
2.83
1.17
Each year of age is worth about a shot a round on average. The 17s supply 8 of the top 15, and they are the first to leave the junior ranks. The players who will be alongside Will until March 2028 are the 16s and the 15s, and 4 of the 15s are already in the top 15, including the best score of the week.
Player
Age group
Pooled position
Rounds
Total
Byron Rieck
Boys 15
1
67 · 71 · 70 · 66
274
Zac Oyston
Boys 17
2
68 · 71 · 72 · 64
275
Lan Vu
Boys 15
T3
71 · 69 · 67 · 69
276
Archie Alston
Boys 17
T3
69 · 65 · 73 · 69
276
Frankie Niall
Boys 17
5
69 · 70 · 69 · 70
278
Jesse Linden
Boys 15
T6
70 · 66 · 73 · 70
279
Jackson Leonard
Boys 17
T6
66 · 75 · 70 · 68
279
Hamish Robb
Boys 17
T6
72 · 65 · 70 · 72
279
Beau Cain
Boys 15
T9
74 · 68 · 68 · 71
281
William Eldridge
Boys 16
T9
72 · 71 · 73 · 65
281
Alan Xin
Boys 16
T9
68 · 69 · 75 · 69
281
Riley Lam
Boys 16
T9
70 · 72 · 67 · 72
281
Elbert Kim
Boys 17
T9
68 · 68 · 73 · 72
281
Charlie Peng
Boys 17
T9
70 · 71 · 68 · 72
281
Malachy Marshall
Boys 17
T9
69 · 68 · 71 · 73
281
Will’s numbers in one place
Measure
Will
Top 15 average
Gap
Will’s rank of 156
72-hole total
281
278.9
+2.1
T9
Shots gained per round
+6.04
+6.33
−0.29
9th
Level for the week, model estimate (shots per round under the average finisher)
−5.09
−5.41
+0.32
10th
Birdies or better per round
4.50
4.17
+0.33
7th
Bogeys per round
2.00
2.30
−0.30
5th
Doubles or worse per round
1.00
0.40
+0.60
59th
Shots lost to doubles or worse, per round
2.00
0.87
+1.13
55th
Par 5s: shots gained per round
+2.60
+1.90
+0.70
2nd
Par 5s: birdie or better
69%
52%
+17 pts
1st
Long par 4s: shots gained per round
+0.82
+0.49
+0.33
14th
Mid par 4s: shots gained per round
+0.84
+1.45
−0.61
40th
Short par 4s: shots gained per round
+0.74
+1.09
−0.35
34th
Par 3s: shots gained per round
+1.04
+1.40
−0.36
32nd
First nine played: shots gained
+4.14
+3.31
+0.84
4th
Second nine played: shots gained
+1.89
+3.02
−1.13
30th
Second nine minus first nine
−2.25
−0.29
−1.96
141st
First three holes played: shots gained
+1.12
+1.03
+0.09
16th
Last three holes played: shots gained
+0.72
+1.12
−0.40
42nd
Best round, adjusted for conditions
64.2
66.6
−2.4
2nd
Worst round, adjusted for conditions
72.9
72.8
+0.1
10th
Spread of his four rounds (standard deviation)
3.92
2.75
+1.17
114th
Next hole after a bogey or worse, against the rest of that round
+0.23
−0.03
+0.26
11th
Windy round (R2) against his other three
−1.68
−0.21
−1.46
104th
Rank 1 is always the best. Shots gained figures are per round unless stated.
What this points to for preparation
Make the second nine a target in its own right.
It is worth about 4.5 shots a week on this evidence, more than any other single item.
Agree a short reset routine and use it at the turn and after any dropped shot, whether or not he feels he needs it.
Set a damage rule for when a hole goes wrong: take the bogey. Four bogeys in place of the four doubles is four shots.
Practise second nines: nine holes straight after a full session, or nine holes with a score to protect.
At each event, note first-nine and second-nine scores and where any double came. Three or four more events will show whether this is a pattern.
Mid-irons into par 3s of 160 to 190 m.
About 2.7 shots a week against the top 15. On the SkyTrak, measure carry and left-right spread with the clubs he hits from those distances, and check whether his slight right miss with irons explains the dropped shots.
Wedge-length approaches on short and mid par 4s.
About 4.0 shots a week against the top 15, though two of the doubles are in that figure, so it overlaps with the first item. This is where the top group makes its birdies. A partial-wedge distance chart built on the SkyTrak is the obvious starting point, along with a set plan for short, risky par 4s like the 10th.
Keep the strengths sharp.
Par 5 scoring, the long par 4s and fast starts are real advantages over a field this strong. They rest on driving, so that should stay a priority and not be traded away for the items above.
Leave weather and tee times alone for now.
Nothing in this event supports a change.
The first three items overlap, because the same shots are being counted from different angles. They are not 11 separate shots.
Limits, and what to record next
One week, one course. Four rounds is a small sample for any one player. The field-level findings are firm; the Will-specific ones are leads.
The groups are defined by this week’s scores. The top 15 are partly the players who had a good week. What is informative is where their advantage came from, not that they had one.
Hole scores cannot split the game. Nothing here separates driving, approach play, short game and putting. Hole length and par stand in for the clubs used.
What would close that gap: at future events, for each hole, record fairway hit, green in regulation, first-putt distance, number of putts, any penalty, and the club and distance of the approach. Twenty seconds a hole would let these patterns be tied to his SkyTrak data.
Repeat the exercise. The same pull at the next two or three events will show which names keep turning up and which of these patterns hold.
How the numbers were made
Scores for all three boys’ divisions were taken from the Golf Genius scorecards and checked against the published leaderboards. Starting holes and tee times came from the tee sheets.
How hard each day and wave played was estimated with a model that gives every player a level for the week and every day-and-wave combination a difficulty. Tee times in rounds 3 and 4 were set by position, so the model treats each player’s level as uncertain instead of fixing it at his four-round average. Without that step the late waves look harder than they were, because players who are leading are, on average, slightly ahead of their true level.
Shots gained on a hole is the score an average finisher would be expected to make on that hole, that day, in that wave, minus the player’s score. Figures labelled “against his own level” also subtract the player’s level for the week, shared across holes in proportion to how much each hole separates good players from weaker ones.
“Solid” means the difference is several times larger than its margin of error. “Suggestive” means it is visible but could plausibly be chance. Likely ranges are 90% intervals.
This page is being set up for US college coaches. It is not ready to circulate.
On file
Name
William Eldridge
Home club
Avondale GC, New South Wales, Australia
Plays
Right-handed
Handicap
+2.4
Age
16. Turns 18 in March 2028.
Latest result
Tied 1st, Boys 16 Years, Jack Newton International Junior Classic, October 2026: 72, 71, 73, 65 for 281 (3 under). All results
Still needed
What a college coach will usually ask for first.
Graduation year
To be added
School
To be added
Academic record
To be added
SAT or ACT scores
To be added
NCAA Eligibility Center ID
To be added
Scoring average and rankings
To be added as the results record grows
Swing video
To be added
Coach reference
To be added
Contact
To be added
Before this goes to coaches
The Development and Analysis sections are working documents for William’s team. A version for college coaches would carry this profile, his results and selected analysis.
