Comments on: Random Tour Thoughts http://thesandtrap.com/columns/thrash_talk/random_tour_thoughts Golf News, Reviews, and Commentary Tue, 02 Dec 2008 13:24:10 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5 By: Erik J. Barzeski http://thesandtrap.com/columns/thrash_talk/random_tour_thoughts#comment-3090 Erik J. Barzeski Thu, 07 Sep 2006 11:02:28 +0000 http://thesandtrap.com/uncategorized/random_tour_thoughts/#comment-3090 Allin, you've clearly missed the joke. Did you see the smileys? And my name is Erik, not Eric. Allin, you've clearly missed the joke. Did you see the smileys?

And my name is Erik, not Eric.

]]> By: allin http://thesandtrap.com/columns/thrash_talk/random_tour_thoughts#comment-3089 allin Thu, 07 Sep 2006 03:38:34 +0000 http://thesandtrap.com/uncategorized/random_tour_thoughts/#comment-3089 You cannot take a statistical measure as Eric has and correctly state that this proves someone is x times better than someone else. This type of statistic is valid only as a predictive measure. It is not a direct qualitative measure. See Sagrin sports ratings for example. They do not prove one team is x times better than another, they only establish a basis for predicting one teams likely success when compared to a differnt team. It allows for a ranking but does not establish specific qualitative differences. The limits of this type of statistic is shown by the number of upsets that occur. Eric has refused to acknowledge any response which doesn't disprove his math and conclusion. You cannot do that. That doesn't mean the conclusion is correct. I have pointed out why the reasoning used is flawed and that it violates the tenents of logic. Since he has defined the acceptable response in a way which requires you to disprove his conclusion using his improper logical structure this is impossible. The truth remains that his logic is flawed and therefore his conclusion is wrong. He is not man enough to admit it however. You cannot take a statistical measure as Eric has and correctly state that this proves someone is x times better than someone else. This type of statistic is valid only as a predictive measure. It is not a direct qualitative measure. See Sagrin sports ratings for example. They do not prove one team is x times better than another, they only establish a basis for predicting one teams likely success when compared to a differnt team. It allows for a ranking but does not establish specific qualitative differences. The limits of this type of statistic is shown by the number of upsets that occur. Eric has refused to acknowledge any response which doesn't disprove his math and conclusion. You cannot do that. That doesn't mean the conclusion is correct. I have pointed out why the reasoning used is flawed and that it violates the tenents of logic. Since he has defined the acceptable response in a way which requires you to disprove his conclusion using his improper logical structure this is impossible. The truth remains that his logic is flawed and therefore his conclusion is wrong. He is not man enough to admit it however.

]]> By: Erik J. Barzeski http://thesandtrap.com/columns/thrash_talk/random_tour_thoughts#comment-3088 Erik J. Barzeski Wed, 06 Sep 2006 13:03:36 +0000 http://thesandtrap.com/uncategorized/random_tour_thoughts/#comment-3088 Glad you came around, Cody. I now submit that Tiger is now almost three times as good as Phil Mickelson, at least in the eyes of the OWGR. 1. Woods 22.59 2. Mickelson 8.83 :-) :-) :-) Glad you came around, Cody. I now submit that Tiger is now almost three times as good as Phil Mickelson, at least in the eyes of the OWGR.

1. Woods 22.59
2. Mickelson 8.83

:-) :-) :-)

]]> By: Francois http://thesandtrap.com/columns/thrash_talk/random_tour_thoughts#comment-3087 Francois Wed, 06 Sep 2006 04:36:49 +0000 http://thesandtrap.com/uncategorized/random_tour_thoughts/#comment-3087 Don't forget to watch records of Bjorn and Westwood at the K Club !! The englishman has two victories. The Dane lost last year event on the 17th tee the last day ! Sending balls in the water and making 11 shots to complete that hole. Westwood is far more motivate than any americans to win the ryder cup. Picks from europe have so much more experience in Ryder Cup history than Cink and Verplank. No doubt Ian Woosnam at least take one good decision so far. Don't forget to watch records of Bjorn and Westwood at the K Club !! The englishman has two victories. The Dane lost last year event on the 17th tee the last day ! Sending balls in the water and making 11 shots to complete that hole. Westwood is far more motivate than any americans to win the ryder cup. Picks from europe have so much more experience in Ryder Cup history than Cink and Verplank. No doubt Ian Woosnam at least take one good decision so far.

]]> By: Andy Greenwald http://thesandtrap.com/columns/thrash_talk/random_tour_thoughts#comment-3086 Andy Greenwald Tue, 05 Sep 2006 17:28:12 +0000 http://thesandtrap.com/uncategorized/random_tour_thoughts/#comment-3086 Interesting writing. I can see your Euro Ryder picks just as easy as the 2 Ian went with. I am not sure the captain's picks mean as much as to sway the team favored to the US side, but Clarke and Westwood gel with the rest of the team very well. There is a team chemistry factor that counts for something. It is hard to put that in points or strokes, but the Euro team chemistry seems to have worked well in the last 10 years. It still comes down to which side will play better golf. Both teams have their players that are playing well and some that are struggling. I still think Tiger must win 4.5 points for the US to have a good chance, but Phil also needs to play well (3.5 pts) in my mind for the US team to pull it off. The US team can, but they will need some putts to fall. The course does not favor the Euro's as much as the Belfry typically does. It should be fun. Interesting writing.

I can see your Euro Ryder picks just as easy as the 2 Ian went with. I am not sure the captain's picks mean as much as to sway the team favored to the US side, but Clarke and Westwood gel with the rest of the team very well. There is a team chemistry factor that counts for something. It is hard to put that in points or strokes, but the Euro team chemistry seems to have worked well in the last 10 years.

It still comes down to which side will play better golf. Both teams have their players that are playing well and some that are struggling.

I still think Tiger must win 4.5 points for the US to have a good chance, but Phil also needs to play well (3.5 pts) in my mind for the US team to pull it off. The US team can, but they will need some putts to fall. The course does not favor the Euro's as much as the Belfry typically does.

It should be fun.

]]> By: Erik J. Barzeski http://thesandtrap.com/columns/thrash_talk/random_tour_thoughts#comment-3085 Erik J. Barzeski Tue, 05 Sep 2006 13:44:24 +0000 http://thesandtrap.com/uncategorized/random_tour_thoughts/#comment-3085 Poulter and Bjorn are right. The U.S. has a chance now! They're just lucky some Spaniard named Olazabal made it in after thinking he could take a week off. Poulter and Bjorn are right. The U.S. has a chance now! They're just lucky some Spaniard named Olazabal made it in after thinking he could take a week off.

]]> By: Baynative http://thesandtrap.com/columns/thrash_talk/random_tour_thoughts#comment-3084 Baynative Tue, 05 Sep 2006 13:43:12 +0000 http://thesandtrap.com/uncategorized/random_tour_thoughts/#comment-3084 The LPGA tour seems to be forgotten unless MW shows up. The LPGA tour seems to be forgotten unless MW shows up.

]]>