Do you think good golfers get into more trouble than they should when driving?

[pittpanther]

Jeesh, can you guys stay on point???

Someone challenged me, asking if I had ever seen the pros play. I replied that I have volunteered twice at PGA events. So that's over with. Let's move on.

Now that Tiger has missed the cut at Turnberry, check out the thread on the Tour Talk forum. Lots of guys disappointed that the #1 golfer of our time, on the biggest stage in the world, lays an egg. Please don't take my word for it - read the thread.

Also, please check the leaderboard, especially all the big names that missed the cut. Guys like Poulter shooting +14! I would have thought he would eat Links courses for breakfast.

Again let me be clear - I know these guys are good. But it's the lack of consistency week-to-week that annoys me. Tell me again why you're so sure that someone who shoots +14 (two days) at a wide-open Links course, with 2 weeks to prepare, with a caddy, with a detailed yardage book, without severe weather, would shoot a 60 at a local muni? If you tell me he "just had a bad day" at Turnberry, well hell. Maybe he'll have a bad day at the muni as well. Especially if he play a course with no yardage markers...

These guys are good, but they don't walk on water, is all I'm saying.

[iacas]

I would have thought he would eat Links courses for breakfast.

Well, given what others think of your opinions on things...

But it's the lack of consistency week-to-week that annoys me.

You've not really proven any lack of consistency, and I don't think you could really quantify it at all.

And you realize that cuts are determined by the play of everyone. It's not like there's some standard of excellence, and anyone who is "consistently" better than that makes the cut. Using scoring to determine "consistency" is a horrible way to go. If you don't see why, well... I suspect you probably don't, actually.

Tell me again why you're so sure that someone who shoots +14 (two days) at a wide-open Links course, with 2 weeks to prepare, with a caddy, with a detailed yardage book, without severe weather, would shoot a 60 at a local muni?

If you don't understand why, quite frankly, you haven't paid much attention at the Tour events at which you've volunteered. Nobody's going to convince you that you're way off base - of that

I am convinced.

If you tell me he "just had a bad day" at Turnberry, well hell. Maybe he'll have a bad day at the muni as well.

Yeah, and a bad day at your muni is a 68.

These guys are good, but they don't walk on water, is all I'm saying.

Nobody's saying they are. But the gap between them, the courses they play and the conditions they face, and regular players and courses is far, far, far, FAR wider than you seem to understand.

[pittpanther]

Well, given what others think of your opinions on things...

Don't care what a bunch of nameless, faceless people on the Internet think of me. I'm interested in the discussion, not having a mutual admiration society on this board.

And you realize that cuts are determined by the play of everyone. It's not like there's some standard of excellence, and anyone who is "consistently" better than that makes the cut. Using scoring to determine "consistency" is a horrible way to go. If you don't see why, well... I suspect you probably don't, actually.

Oh, I understand the concept of the cut line very well, thank you. And if all, or even most, cut lines were well below par, then I would not be complaining. But they're not. So I am.

What else should I use to measure consistency? Cuts made? Top tens?

If you don't understand why, quite frankly, you haven't paid much attention at the Tour events at which you've volunteered. Nobody's going to convince you that you're way off base - of that

Why are you so convinced? No one on this thread has even tried an argument in the other direction. Just hemming and hawing about "you just don't understand" and "you must never have attended a pro event." That's the standard Internet argument, but you've really done nothing. I haven't insulted anyone one this thread, or challenged their "right" to have an opinion based on how many tour events they've attended.

Any debate skills in your bag? Give me a well-thought-out, reasoned argument.

[Shorty]

Tell me again why you're so sure that someone who shoots +14 (two days) at a wide-open Links course, with 2 weeks to prepare, with a caddy, with a detailed yardage book, without severe weather, would shoot a 60 at a local muni?

Which "wide open links course" are you talking about? In case you haven't noticed, it's hard to see below the knees of the players who are missing the (extremely narrow) fairways at Turnberry.

[CG031]

Now that Tiger has missed the cut at Turnberry, check out the thread on the Tour Talk forum. Lots of guys disappointed that the #1 golfer of our time, on the biggest stage in the world, lays an egg. Please don't take my word for it - read the thread.

LOL. Wow, you provide some good humor.

I have a friend that is a +3 handicap, he hasn't even given trying to make the Tour a thought. When he plays Muni. courses, he generally shoots in the high 60's, an off day will give him a low 70's round, maybe mid 70's if he truly plays horrible. Now this is a very good player, but not even close to the guys on Tour...They may not shoot 60, but they'll shoot low to mid 60's over four rounds, I guarantee it. They're probably going to shoot around -25 over four rounds, maybe even better. You must not understand the Tour dude and how well these guys can SCORE. It's incredible. And yeah there is inconsistency week to week, and yeah they don't walk on water, because they are HUMAN BEINGS.

[iacas]

I'm interested in the discussion, not having a mutual admiration society on this board.

It IS about having a discussion, to which your posts are not contributing anything of value.

If all, or even most, cut lines were well below par, then I would not be complaining.

You've yet to tell us why the cut line is a good measure of "consistency" when weather, course setup, and the field changes every week. Why should the cut line at the U.S. Open be as far under par as at the Bob Hope or FBR?

What else should I use to measure consistency? Cuts made? Top tens?

You're the only one harping on "inconsistency." This topic is about good golfers - not even necessarily those on the PGA Tour - getting off the tee. PGA Tour golf is, in a lot of ways, about hitting greens and making putts. Their scores are off-topic unless you can show how "getting into trouble when driving" is a huge factor in determining how PGA Tour players score.

Why are you so convinced? No one on this thread has even tried an argument in the other direction.

Because you've not presented an actual argument.

Give me a well-thought-out, reasoned argument.

Uhm, you first. And start a new thread, because it's off-topic here. Seriously - go ahead and start a new thread, present your topic (whatever it is), and have that discussion there. It doesn't belong here.

To get back on topic... I think good players don't get into more trouble off the tee. I think part of being a good player is knowing where the trouble is, how far you carry the ball, and managing your game really well. I also think that if you play the appropriate tees for your handicap, you tend to (generalization, yes) hit the ball into the trouble (fairway bunkers, whatever). Sure, an 18 handicapper playing the tips might not reach a fairway hazard all day, but from the white tees he may be hitting into them all the time, and will lack the course management and consistency of strike and shot shape as the lower handicapper.