Jump to content
IGNORED

Northeast Get Together 2021


Recommended Posts

  • Moderator

@billchao, @nevets88, @jamo and I try to get together for a round every year. We generally try to meet in the middle. We are looking to see if other New England, NY and NJ members are interested to get an idea of numbers and location. No date has been set. Bill and I are going to Erie June 12 to 17, so that week is out.  There is also the meet up in Wisconsin in July that Bill is going to. It would be a weekend day. 

Let us know if any of you would be interested and I can map out a place and a potential date. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator

Just to give some people an idea of possible locations, we played Fox Hopyard in East Haddam, CT a couple of times, Keney Park in Hartford, and The Links at Union Vale in LaGrangeville, NY one year.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • 3 weeks later...
On 4/21/2021 at 5:50 PM, billchao said:

Just to give some people an idea of possible locations, we played Fox Hopyard in East Haddam, CT a couple of times, Keney Park in Hartford, and The Links at Union Vale in LaGrangeville, NY one year.

I've played the Links at Union Vale half a dozen times; fun course, for sure.  Lost two wedges there....on separate occasions a few weeks apart. *shakehead* 

Anyway, I'm likely in. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

1 hour ago, RFKFREAK said:

I've played the Links at Union Vale half a dozen times; fun course, for sure.  Lost two wedges there....on separate occasions a few weeks apart. *shakehead* 

Anyway, I'm likely in. 

I'm about 10 minutes from The Links at Union Vale.  Recovering from a bit of surgery, else I'd love to meetup and play.  I've heard Richter Park in Danbury is good, but no personal experience.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Just now, mohearn said:

I'm about 10 minutes from The Links at Union Vale.  Recovering from a bit of surgery, else I'd love to meetup and play.  I've heard Richter Park in Danbury is good, but no personal experience.

 

 

I've played Richter Park.  From what I recall, beautiful views but it was beat up something fierce.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
1 hour ago, RFKFREAK said:

I've played the Links at Union Vale half a dozen times; fun course, for sure.  Lost two wedges there....on separate occasions a few weeks apart. *shakehead* 

Anyway, I'm likely in. 

 

28 minutes ago, mohearn said:

I'm about 10 minutes from The Links at Union Vale.  Recovering from a bit of surgery, else I'd love to meetup and play.  I've heard Richter Park in Danbury is good, but no personal experience.

The Links at Union Vale was a good course. I wouldn’t mind playing there again.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

22 minutes ago, billchao said:

 

The Links at Union Vale was a good course. I wouldn’t mind playing there again.

Depending where folks come from, West Point Golf Course would be a nice location.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I played Richter Park a few weeks ago for the first time. It was nice, though not something I desire to drive two hours for. Playing Links at Union Vale again in a few weeks; that is a course that I don't mind the drive for.

We could look at other central CT courses. Wintonbury Hills is really nice. I'm playing Gillette Ridge tomorrow, which is supposed to be similar. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator

Any of the above mentioned courses will work for me. I basically need to be back before 5 if possible. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • Support TST Affiliates

    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    Whoop
    SuperSpeed
    FlightScope Mevo
    Use the code "iacas" for 10% off Mevo and the code "iacasjun21" for 10% off SuperSpeed.
  • Posts

    • Huh? They don't really look at their yardage books when they're within about 50 yards of the greens now. Why would they start doing this? If you're saying they can't start looking at printed materials within a boundary layer, and they'll just hang out back in the fairway and look at the green slopes, you could say it's your ball position, not the player position. Otherwise the caddy could stand 50 yards away and yell up to the player or something. So I can't believe that's what you're suggesting. They are all saying it's about the skill, not the time. ? ShotLink requires a human to enter the result of the shot. Sometimes they don't see where it is, don't note when it was hit exactly, etc. And… Again, this assumes it's actually about pace of play. Thank you.
    • At some point its appropriate to consider position relative to the group ahead.  Efficient players might arrive at their ball and be required to wait, that shouldn't count against them.  I think you really need to have humans involved.  On the other hand, the policy itself is designed to minimize the potential for a player to be penalized.  Its a long process, they have to get out of position, get warned they're on the clock, then get a first bad time and get warned again, then get a second bad time and have a penalty stroke assessed. I think they could find ways to tighten up the policy, but I don't think the bulk of the players want to see things get tighter. I should add, this thread originally was based on the decision to ban green-reading books.  I understand that some of the motivation may be pace of play, so I understand the direction we're taking, but we probably shouldn't get too far down the slow play rabbit-hole in this thread, lest we veer completely .  Yes, I'm as guilty as anyone, so hopefully this is the last time I discuss slow play here.
    • Hey guys, I need your help.  I just bought an 8.5 degree M4 used off of 2nd swing.  It was given a 7 which means scuffs wear etc, but nothing that would hurt performance. Anyway, I hit it yesterday and the thing I noticed was that it was not loud at all.  Sounded kind of dead actually.  The ball seemed to fly nicely though.  Now admittedly I was comparing it to the sound my m3 makes (which folks have told me is ear piercing).  That said, I'm wondering from folks who have used an M4 and M3 if you think the M4 had a much more muted sound from the m3 or not.  Also, di you think the M4 was loud, or did your M4 have a more muted sound as well? The only othe thing I could think of is that maybe the lower loft on the M4 made for a more muted sound? Please let me know asap as I'm concerned I might have a dead driver and need to send it back to 2nd swing (still paid $220 for it). Thanks for your help guys!
    • I think a lot of offset also makes it harder to aim the face. It tended to make me align more left. 
    • I'm fairly sure this would go over about like a lead balloon, if only because then players are going to be motivated to start pacing off every single short game shot around the green instead of just looking at the pre-measured distances on their yardage book. If pace of play enforcement remains unchanged, as awful as it currently is, this would only make for even slower rounds on the tour. At its core, this seems to be a pace of play issue rather than an issue of making the game "too easy". People may say it's about the game being "too easy", but the data doesn't actually show putting to be any easier today than it was decades ago.  Median SG putting on the tour this year is +0.030, and the median SG putting in 2004 (the first year it was tracked) was 0.028. Top SG putting this year is 0.990 and top SG putting in '04 was 0.853, in '05 it was 0.939. The only place there is any difference is in the very best putters on the tour, but even then it's relatively minimal. 2021 sees 15 golfers with SG putting values 0.6 or higher, while 2004 saw 13 golfers with SG putting values 0.5 or higher. That said, the worst putters in 2021 are much worse than the worst of 2004, with -1.326 SG in 2021 and -0.871 in 2004. In 2004 only 9 players were -0.5 strokes or worse, and in 2021 there are 25 players losing more than 0.5 strokes per round from putting alone! That 0.1 strokes per round difference may seem large considering the tight scoring averages, but it's no different than what you see for every other SG stat - the best players today are better than the best players of 2004 and the worst players are worse in 2021 than in 2004 while the average stays the same (because SG is a metric compared relative to the field, after all). There is a bigger difference between the best and worst players in every category nowadays than there used to be, if the game was easier you would see that gap between best and worst shrink instead of grow. The game is clearly more difficult now on tour than it used to be, and the data is unanimous in highlighting this. With that in mind, here's what I'd propose instead: Enforce the pace of play rules more strictly - it's literally that simple. Forget about the Observation List BS, and just start enforcing pace of play for every single player on the course. Quit using unreliable officials with stopwatches, and just use the far more reliable ShotLink to measure each player with less manpower required. 40 seconds to hit every shot for every player, 10 extra seconds for the first player to hit. One bad time is a warning, further bad times are a one stroke penalty. Because enforcement is both more widespread and more strict, make the warnings reset after each round so that a player gets one warning per round instead of one warning per tournament. Better yet, use a small portion of the advertising dollars to create a second pot of money alongside the new popularity contest. Rank players based on a weighted scale of scoring average and number of pace warnings, call it "player efficiency" or something, and award money to the top-10 finishers. If the Tour shows it's serious about pace of play by putting their money where their mouth is and players will start to listen. Until then it's all bark, no bite, and slow play will happen regardless of players using green books or other charts and data.  
  • Today's Birthdays

    1. bucky207
      bucky207
      (47 years old)
    2. just pat
      just pat
      (78 years old)
    3. KSTEPH
      KSTEPH
      (60 years old)

×
×
  • 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...