Course Profiles / Pete Dye Stadium Course
Course Profile

Pete Dye Stadium Course:
what wins here.

The American Express, Desert Classic · 8 editions, 2019–2026 · 1,881 rounds analyzed

Course-fit weights
OTT 24% · less decisive
APP 25% · neutral
ARG 26% · rewarded
PUTT 25% · neutral
Derived by regressing finishing position on strokes gained at this course, measured against the tour-wide baseline, then tested on seasons the model had never seen. Based on 585 player-events.

How it plays

Not what the scorecard says — what this course does to the same players, measured against everywhere else they play. Built from 1,881 rounds across 8 editions, and ranked against every course in the archive.

MeasureVersus elsewhereWhich meansAcross the archive
Driving distance −4.9 yds shorter off the tee here 17th shortest of 89
Fairways hit +0.3 pp easier to find middle of the pack
Greens in regulation +3.2 pp easier to hit 20th easiest to hit of 88
Scrambling +4.9 pp easier to save par 6th easiest to save from of 81

Scoring. These players average 1.73 shots fewer per round here than they do elsewhere.

Plays most like. Golf Club of Houston, TPC Twin Cities, Accordia Golf Narashino — the closest courses in the archive on those four measures together.

A record of what happened, not a forecast. Estimates are shrunk toward the tour mean by how much evidence each course has, and every baseline leaves the course itself out, so a venue cannot define the average it is measured against. Split-half reliability 0.888. Weather is not controlled for.

Who has played above themselves here

Strokes gained per round at this course against the same player’s own average everywhere else. Being a good player is not enough to appear on this list — the comparison is with himself, so what is left is the part that belongs to the course.

PlayerRounds hereHereElsewhereGap
Tom Hoge 14 +2.43 +0.14 +0.84
Adam Hadwin 12 +2.22 +0.21 +0.67
Cameron Davis 12 +1.96 +0.01 +0.65
Si Woo Kim 15 +1.90 +0.53 +0.53
Sam Burns 13 +1.92 +0.81 +0.39
Andrew Putnam 16 +1.28 +0.37 +0.37
The gap is pulled toward zero by how few rounds sit behind it, so a player seen four times here does not outrank one seen twenty. Read it as a record, not a projection: players who keep coming back to a course are partly the ones it has already suited, and that selection is inside these numbers.

What the data says

Across 8 editions (2019–2026), around the green is the category that most separates players who contend here from those who do not — 26% of the model's weighting, against 24% for off the tee.

The spread is narrow, which is itself the finding: this course does not strongly favour one kind of player. Weights this close to even mean the field sorts mostly on overall quality, and any course-fit edge here is small.

The winners tell a partly separate story: in 3 of the last 7, the champion's best category for the week was putting. That differs from what the model weights, and the gap is instructive — winning weeks are outlier weeks, usually powered by one skill running hot on top of the baseline the course demands.

How the winners won

Strokes gained per round for every champion here since 2019. The highlighted figure is that winner's best category for the week. A dash means the category split is not published for that event — only the total is.

YearWinnerTo ParOTTAPPARGPUTTTotal
2026Scottie Scheffler-10+1.45+0.21+0.74+0.98+3.38
2025Sepp Straka-10+0.69+1.17+0.44+1.89+4.19
2024Nick Dunlap-9-0.32+1.01-0.50+1.45+1.64
2023Jon Rahm-11+0.84+2.01+0.30-1.11+2.04
2022Hudson Swafford-14-0.20+2.15+0.44+3.20+5.60
2021Si Woo Kim-19+0.67+2.63+0.56+1.19+5.06
2020Andrew Landry-11+1.18+1.94-0.90+1.81+4.03
Method. Weights come from regressing top-20 finishes on players' strokes gained in each category, using only rounds played before each event, and comparing each course against the tour-wide baseline — so a weight measures what this course rewards more than golf generally does, not simply which skills help. Weights are kept only where they predicted results out of sample; where they did not, we say so. We tested our previous method, found it did not predict, and published that too: how the model works.

The field, ranked before they play.

Every tournament week we score the field on course fit and player quality. Lab Notes lands every Tuesday with what the numbers say, free.

Free every week. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

More: all course profiles · live tournament stats · the research series