or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by ghalfaire

First I always look around for a free tee on the tee box.  Of course I always wait until it is my turn so as to not disturb others.  Darn things are expensive and I just don't understand why people leave their used but perfectly good tees laying around after they hit.  More money than sense I guess. 
To the first point, yes, either a vanity or sandbagger is difficult to get away with as a club member.  Of course if you're a brand new member you might get away with it for a round or so.  But after a round or two it usually is obvious. To the second point a vanity handicap isn't always harmless albeit not as damaging as sandbaggers.   To the last point, at our club there is a handicap committee that oversees this.  Sometimes they "adjust" a player's handicap for all club...
I didn't reply to this back when the thread was young but decided I would this time and voted for sandbagging.  However "vanity handicaps" are not harmless.  I once had signed up for a tournament at my club, a 2 player best ball of three rounds, and my partner took ill a day before the start.  I was going to drop out but the pro said we had a new member who wanted to play and if OK with me he would replace my partner.  I said yes.  I think this fellow had a 12.x handicap...
Me too.  I keep an old computer around that runs on vista just so I can play these.
I believe it will be a big deal.  Not sure Tiger believe this however as he set his goal at breaking Jack's record of 18 professional majors. and likely will not see this mark as making him exceptional.  At least not exceptional enough to suit him. 
Just because Jack said that doesn't make it so.   Maybe your post script just means that lower ranked players had as much a chance to win then as they do now and therefor it was just as difficult for the better player to separate themselves from field as it is today.  
Actually the only "no fly" zones I have ever seen were there to either protect other golfers, workers, or property.  Usually enforced with a very high fence unless the zones are temporary.
Indeed he was. I doubt his 15 stroke win of the 2000 US Open with a score 272 vs 287 for second place will ever be matched.  I don't recall any major wins with anywhere near that large of margin mid to late 19th century.  I also think his 2008 win on a broken leg was impressive. Sometimes I think the difference between Jack and Tiger is Jack just did what he had to to win (sort of like a few pool hustlers I used to know) and a win by a stroke was as good for him as a win...
You're correct that isn't what is being said.  I think what the poll implies however that Jack's 18 majors might not as significant an achievement as Tiger' 14 majors (actually the poll includes the US Amateur tournament wins)  because there are more players capable of winning in the field in any tournament today than in Jack's time.  The idea that more players that can win any tournament today is inferred by the fact that the Standard Deviation of the distributions of PGA...
After reading a lot of the posts and especially the more recent ones,  one really does have to ask "does the entire PGA tour really matter or is it just the top players that have a realistic chance to win?".  
New Posts  All Forums: