Jump to content
IGNORED

Would You Rather…?


iacas

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, burr said:

Me thinks it was the politics of the matter of the easterns were wearing our asses out on the basketball court that started it all    

This is off-topic, but I don't think that's true. Before "The Dream Team" in 1992 the US had won every Olympic gold medal in Basketball save 2 years. 1988, when the (we didn't know they were crumbling, but they were crumbling) USSR won. And the famous 1972 Munich Games. … You can't count not winning in 1980 as the US didn't go. 

I've always been told that "The Dream Team" was started because the FIBA (basketball's international governing body) had been lobbying for a decade to allow the NBA players into the Olympics as they felt it would be good for the growth of the game. … I would argue it worked. 

  • Like 2

My bag is an ever-changing combination of clubs. 

A mix I am forever tinkering with. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

On 3/4/2020 at 6:06 AM, ChetlovesMer said:

Would you rather...? #20:

Win an Olympic Golf Medal in Golf this year or Win one of the majors this year (you can pick which one)? 

If I'm a professional golfer, winning a major is going to be far more important for me than winning an Olympic gold medal.  The money is obvious. If we aren't simply assuming that a guy who wins the Olympics is probably already set as a professional golfer, there is only one way to go here.

33 minutes ago, burr said:

Me thinks it was the politics of the matter of the easterns were wearing our asses out on the basketball court that started it all and it kinda snowballed

Lots better examples than basketball. The U.S. won plenty of golds in basketball before involving the professionals and it would have been more if not for the screw job in 1972. 

Many of the most over-the-top transgressions actually happened in the traditional track and field and swimming events. ... Of course, as a hockey guy, I know few teams were more professional that the old Soviet Red Army was.

Edited by mcanadiens
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

1 hour ago, ChetlovesMer said:

This is off-topic, but I don't think that's true. Before "The Dream Team" in 1992 the US had won every Olympic gold medal in Basketball save 2 years. 1988, when the (we didn't know they were crumbling, but they were crumbling) USSR won. And the famous 1972 Munich Games. … You can't count not winning in 1980 as the US didn't go. 

I've always been told that "The Dream Team" was started because the FIBA (basketball's international governing body) had been lobbying for a decade to allow the NBA players into the Olympics as they felt it would be good for the growth of the game. … I would argue it worked. 

I understand off topic (and expected this), just keeping with the flow from previous several posts before answering the question.

49 minutes ago, mcanadiens said:

 

Lots better examples than basketball. The U.S. won plenty of golds in basketball before involving the professionals and it would have been more if not for the screw job in 1972. 

Many of the most over-the-top transgressions actually happened in the traditional track and field and swimming events. ... Of course, as a hockey guy, I know few teams were more professional that the old Soviet Red Army was.

Yes, many more better examples, not much more $$ exampled though.  Basketball was rather over the top;  everybody knew what USA had and what USA could do with the NBA team. 

Edited by burr
Link to comment
Share on other sites


11 hours ago, ChetlovesMer said:

And I'm okay with that. 

Fair enough. I've never actually looked up the IOC's mission statement. I just remember the Olympics of the 70's and 80's. They felt really different back then. But, you are very right in one aspect. I probably need to drop my "back in my day" sort of thinking. Yes, back in the 70's and 80's you never saw any of the "Olympic" sports until the Olympics. You usually didn't know any of the athletes names who were competing, unless it was their second Olympiad (or if you followed college basketball). So, the Olympics back just felt different. Not to mention we had the cold war, so their was that. 

I think a lot of people, myself included, want things to be/stay the way they remember them when they were a kid. Of course, the world is totally different now. I guess I should allow the Olympics to be different too. 

Holy crap! I thought I was old! Yes, they "felt" different, but they really weren't. The IOC, along with Avery Brundage, were selling you a bill of goods! After Brundage retired, the office of IOC President went vacant for quite a few years before Lord Killanin took it over. He was a disaster and was replaced by Juan Antonio Samaranch. Samaranch was corrupt as hell, but he understood reality, and knew where the money was coming from!

11 hours ago, burr said:

at one time, the games were for the amatuer athlete.  Now I don't know about no Ruskies, Czecks, or anybody in a different society, but the USA teams were amatuers that made no $$ off the sport.  It was afterwards that they went on the Wheaties box and made the spoils. 

Me thinks it was the politics of the matter of the easterns were wearing our asses out on the basketball court that started it all and it kinda snowballed, with all these elites wanting a medal on their chest, like they didn't already have a mantel full (plus the multi-millions).  Some of these skipped the college work to make immediate $$ and although each had done some amatuer status of some sort at some point and each had 'paid the dues', I saw no right to play the games (in the original concepts).  If we picked the kids, the jrs, the amatuers, I would appreciate it.

As for the question, since these changes, the games make little difference to me;  I'll take the Masters Tournament.  and I've been attending since GeorgeArcher won it...

   

The US teams were amateurs as far as you know! 

10 hours ago, pg15 said:

Major no question, this is the ultimate in our sport, Olympics should be for Amateurs and almost a right of passage before going professional, a bit like a lot do in boxing where they turn pro after Olympics, only my opinion, although I do still like watching the golf in the Olympics :-)

 

I'm amazed at those who think that amateur athletics has always been as pure as the driven snow! 

10 hours ago, ChetlovesMer said:

This is off-topic, but I don't think that's true. Before "The Dream Team" in 1992 the US had won every Olympic gold medal in Basketball save 2 years. 1988, when the (we didn't know they were crumbling, but they were crumbling) USSR won. And the famous 1972 Munich Games. … You can't count not winning in 1980 as the US didn't go. 

I've always been told that "The Dream Team" was started because the FIBA (basketball's international governing body) had been lobbying for a decade to allow the NBA players into the Olympics as they felt it would be good for the growth of the game. … I would argue it worked. 

True! In the 1972 games the refs, or the IOC, were bought off to hand the gold medal to the Soviets. It was an absolute travesty! In 1988 the Russkies had Arvidas Sabonis at his peak, and he was unstoppable! Yes, we had taught them well, and they were good students. Think about it, Sabonis came to the NBA long after his knees were shot, and he could still be a dominant player! Sabonis was damned good! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I'd take a green jacket over a gold medal. The Olympics just doesn't do it for me, other than women's beach volleyball. 

 :tmade: Stealth2 driver, 3 hybrid. :ping: G410 Fairway  :titleist: 5-AW  :vokey: 52/56/60 SM9

:tmade: Spider Tour X putter

:snell: MTB Prime X, :adidas: Tour360 22

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

7 hours ago, Buckeyebowman said:

Holy crap! I thought I was old! Yes, they "felt" different, but they really weren't. The IOC, along with Avery Brundage, were selling you a bill of goods! After Brundage retired, the office of IOC President went vacant for quite a few years before Lord Killanin took it over. He was a disaster and was replaced by Juan Antonio Samaranch. Samaranch was corrupt as hell, but he understood reality, and knew where the money was coming from!

Of course, you are right. But I was a kid back then. So, I was buying. 

 

7 hours ago, Buckeyebowman said:

I'm amazed at those who think that amateur athletics has always been as pure as the driven snow! 

And next you are going to tell me Santa Claus isn't real...………...

My bag is an ever-changing combination of clubs. 

A mix I am forever tinkering with. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

16 hours ago, ChetlovesMer said:

Of course, you are right. But I was a kid back then. So, I was buying. 

 

And next you are going to tell me Santa Claus isn't real...………...

I did too, but after a while you start learning things, picking up on other stuff, and modifying your opinions. 

About Santa Claus, I had a manager years ago who had two young Sons. The older Son was starting to figure it out, and was about to blow it for the younger one. So, my manager took his older Son out to breakfast on a Saturday morning, and explained things to him. He told him, when we get older we get to BE Santa Claus! The boy was all about that.

And I'd still want to win a gold medal. Once in a lifetime deal!

Edited by Buckeyebowman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator

You Would You Rather… #21: Shoot 74 85 65 83 or shoot four rounds of 77? 

This is not a question I came up with but asked by Kirk Oguri on Twitter. I figured it was worth asking here. Me, I’d rather know I have a 65 in me. The first option averages to 76.75. I think I’m missing on the subtext though the question probably has something to do with Matt Every missing the cut. 

Steve

Kill slow play. Allow walking. Reduce ineffective golf instruction. Use environmentally friendly course maintenance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
On 3/7/2020 at 5:50 PM, nevets88 said:

You Would You Rather… #21: Shoot 74 85 65 83 or shoot four rounds of 77? 

Good one.  I like the first one because of the 65, but I hate inconsistency more and shooting a 85 sounds terrible.. So I'll go with #2.

Philip Kohnken, PGA
Director of Instruction, Lake Padden GC, Bellingham, WA

Srixon/Cleveland Club Fitter; PGA Modern Coach; Certified in Dr Kwon’s Golf Biomechanics Levels 1 & 2; Certified in SAM Putting; Certified in TPI
 
Team :srixon:!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

You Would You Rather… #21: Shoot 74 85 65 83 or shoot four rounds of 77? 

My lowest round is 68 (4 under).  So I opt for the round with a 65 in it.  I'll suffer the other lesser rounds.  As it's happening it would be fun to realize and feel shooting a 65, savoring every good shot and every made putt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


11 minutes ago, phillyk said:

Good one.  I like the first one because of the 65, but I hate inconsistency more and shooting a 85 sounds terrible.. So I'll go with #2.

Phil, just consider that those scores are on a tricked-up U.S. Open course... that'll make you feel better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


On 3/7/2020 at 5:50 PM, nevets88 said:

You Would You Rather… #21: Shoot 74 85 65 83 or shoot four rounds of 77? 

 

I shoot 77 often enough.  I’ve never been in the 60’s, let alone 65.  I’ll take #1 all day long!

In David's bag....

Driver: Titleist 910 D-3;  9.5* Diamana Kai'li
3-Wood: Titleist 910F;  15* Diamana Kai'li
Hybrids: Titleist 910H 19* and 21* Diamana Kai'li
Irons: Titleist 695cb 5-Pw

Wedges: Scratch 51-11 TNC grind, Vokey SM-5's;  56-14 F grind and 60-11 K grind
Putter: Scotty Cameron Kombi S
Ball: ProV1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator
On 3/7/2020 at 5:50 PM, nevets88 said:

You Would You Rather… #21: Shoot 74 85 65 83 or shoot four rounds of 77? 

The former.

I'll just assume the 85 and the 83 were me playing lefty. 😉

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

1 hour ago, nevets88 said:

You Would You Rather… #1: Shoot 74 85 65 83 or #2: Shoot four rounds of 77? 

 There is definitely room for improvement in the first option.     The idea that there is a real low score in the bag is really exciting.   That cycle looks like my game plus a few (or more).    😏.     

Specifically at my age, I'll the the second option and shoot four rounds of 77.   I like the consistency.     I may never get to the 65 but shooting 77 each time means there are probably very few mistakes.  

From the land of perpetual cloudiness.   I'm Denny

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

On 3/7/2020 at 5:50 PM, nevets88 said:

You Would You Rather… #21: Shoot 74 85 65 83 or shoot four rounds of 77? 

 

This is a tough one! That range of scores indicates a horrible inconsistency, or someone with a nervous affliction who forgot to take their meds on a couple of days! I hate inconsistency in my game, even though I probably have no logical reason to. If I went from 85 to 65, and then back to 83, I'd probably want to put a bullet in my head! Give me the second choice. 77's every day! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

You Would You Rather… #21: Shoot 74 85 65 83 or shoot four rounds of 77?

I'd take #2. Shoot the four rounds of 77. Consistency in golf is a great thing. 

In My Bag:
A whole bunch of Tour Edge golf stuff...... :beer:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
On 3/7/2020 at 5:50 PM, nevets88 said:

You Would You Rather… #21: Shoot 74 85 65 83 or shoot four rounds of 77? 

#1 definitely. That 65 is going to feel a lot better than the 85 will feel bad.

On 3/8/2020 at 10:54 AM, Patch said:

I'd take #2. Shoot the four rounds of 77. Consistency in golf is a great thing. 

Consistency in score != consistency of play. You can score 77 hitting 12 GIR one day, 8 another, etc.

Bill

“By three methods we may learn wisdom: First, by reflection, which is noblest; Second, by imitation, which is easiest; and third by experience, which is the bitterest.” - Confucius

My Swing Thread

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

On 3/7/2020 at 5:50 PM, nevets88 said:

You Would You Rather… #21: Shoot 74 85 65 83 or shoot four rounds of 77? 

Take #1 as it offers more potential to shoot similar low scores. 

Brian Kuehn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-15%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope.
  • Posts

    • Wordle 1,013 3/6* ⬛🟨⬛🟨🟨 🟩⬛🟩🟩⬛ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
    • Meanwhile, another old Tour Edge guy switches to Callaway for this season. I have a different problem, course dependent set-ups. What I’m wondering is if @dragonsmhas the 8 iron set 5-PW, AW, GW or just 5-PW, GW. Because the PW is 42°, AW 47°, and GW 52°. Because that could potentially be a gap there. The 5-iron to 6-iron length jump is 5/8” instead of 1/2” so you should be careful of that.    @WUTiger the problem most people have with 3-woods is they don’t play them far enough back into their stance. And they usually don’t have enough loft and the shaft is too long. So 3HL, 4 or 5-wood is probably better for most golfers. I do the “Frankenwood” approach. I have both the 3+ and 5 woods. I typically will either add two degrees to the 3+ on 6600 yards or longer courses, or take a degree off the 5-wood on shorter courses than 6300 or so, and use the 5-wood shaft for both. I don’t usually find a situation where I need both the 3 and 5 wood on a course. I don’t play from 7000 yards it’s no fun. Edit: I mostly agree with @WUTiger on the gapping, although a lot of the newer even fixed hosel fairway woods are made better than what we had when we were playing the old Exotics XRails.
    • Wordle 1,013 4/6* ⬛🟦🟦⬛⬛ ⬛🟦⬛🟦🟦 🟧⬛🟧🟧🟧 🟧🟧🟧🟧🟧 par is good after a double bogey yesterday.
    • I did read the fine print tonight. It said replace with “similar features & function”.  8 yeas ago my purchase had features that today are available on the lower end models and the current version of my model has more “bells & whistles” than what I got 8 years ago.  So I am thinking they honored the agreement and I can’t argue the offer. since getting a credit for the full purchase price all I am really out over the past 8 years was the cost of the extended warranty, which was less than a low end  treadmill would have cost me. now the question is which model to replace with.  I’ll stay with Nordic Track or I forfeit the $1,463 credit so I will get Nordic Track.  And they honored the warranty and were not hard to work with which is a plus.
    • Generally speaking, extended warranties are a terrible deal and should almost always be avoided. They are a huge profit center for the companies that offer them, which should tell you almost everything you need to know about how much value most consumers get when purchasing them.  This is correct, and the old adage applies - only buy insurance when you can't afford the loss. This usually doesn't apply to most consumer goods.  To your second question, no I don't believe the offer is fair. They are replacing it, but it is not being replaced at "no cost to you". Since the amount being disputed (over $500) is non-trivial, I would probably push the issue. Don't waste your time on the phone with a customer service agent or a supervisor. They have probably given you all they have the authority to do. Rather, I would look at the terms of your agreement and specifically legal disputes. The odds are you probably agreed to binding arbitration in the event of a dispute. The agreement will outline what steps need to be followed, but it will probably look something like this.  1. Mail the Nordic Track legal department outlining your dispute and indicate you are not satisfied with the resolution offered.  2. Open up a case with the AAA (American Arbitration Association), along with the required documentation. 3. Wait about 4-5 weeks for a case to be opened - at which point someone from Nordic Track's legal department will offer to give you the new model at no cost to you.  They certainly don't want to spend the time and energy to fight you over $500. 4. Enjoy your new Nordic Track at no cost to you. I recently entered binding arbitration against a fairly large and well known company that screwed me over and refused to make it right. In my demand letter, I made a pretty sizeable request that included compensation for my time and frustration. Once it hit their legal department, they cut me a check - no questions asked. It was far cheaper to settle with me than to send their legal team to defend them in the arbitration.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...