Jump to content
Subscribe to the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
IGNORED

"he played terrible."


Note: This thread is 5826 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Recommended Posts

Posted
i know it's just a choice of words, and that most people don't even think about what they're saying, but i'm sure you've all run into people when discussing a player's performance at such and such tournaments on tour, and if said player was having a bad day, they'll say "man, he played terrible. he couldn't hit anything" or some such descriptive.

not a big deal really, because like i said, it's just a choice of words that they probably aren't even really thinking about, but i'm always inclined to correct them and say "no, he played some outstanding golf, it just wasn't good enough to win. that guy's 'terrible' round would still stomp the crap out of you, me, and this other guy combined." because more often than not, a terrible day (or string of days) for a pro is coming off the course like 3 or 4 over for the round. i've come off the course 4 over *once* in my life, and most of the people that i hear saying stuff about how tiger or phil or sergio or whoever played terrible, they usually shoot 90s or 100s.

it just burns my biscuits and i wish people would choose their words a little more accurately.

Posted
well yes, 3 or 4 over is certainly not good for tiger or phil, but what i was getting at is that these people i'm referring to tend to sound condescending towards (whoever), as if they could do better themselves. i'm not saying tiger shooting 4 over is good golf for tiger, i'm saying 4 over is still a Lot better than a lot of people can do, including the "he played terrible" people, but they still manage to make it sound like they could shoot a better score blindfolded and with one hand tied behind their backs.

Posted
  None said:
"That guy's 'terrible' round would still stomp the crap out of you, me, and this other guy combined."

Good point, but you, them and the other guy aren't pro. Go figure.


Posted
I'm just busting your chops. I agree with you, but Tiger, or any other tour pro in the spotlight, is expected to do better than 3, 4, 5 over.

Throw multi-million dollar endorsements in the equation, and 4 over is looking worse and worse.

Posted
If a top pro comes in 10 strokes behind the leader, his play that day WAS terrible... for him.
My playing partner and I were discussing John Daly's 88 a few weeks back. For me, 88 is a great day. When Big John did it, the golfing world (and some on this board) wanted to see him banned for life, and burned at the stake. John played terribly that day, and posted a score I would have been proud of.
Perspective

Posted
  mirv said:
not a big deal really, because like i said, it's just a choice of words that they probably aren't even really thinking about, but I'm always inclined to correct them...

I know just what you mean... every time I hear someone say "He played terrible" I almost can't keep myself from correcting him... it should be "He played

terribly " or "He played terrible golf" or "He played a terrible round". He played terrible is simply not correct grammar.
Bag: Flight SS
Driver: 10.5* r5 draw with Pro Launch blue 65 Stiff
Irons: CCi Forged 3i-pw
Wedges: 56* CG12 black pearl and 60* low bounce RTG 900
Putter: i-Series Anser 35"Ball: e5+Tee: Zero FrictionGlove: FootJoy WeatherSofRangefinder: MedalistShoes: Sp-6 II, Adidas 360Scores this year:92 91...

Posted
  kris said:
Under tour standards, they did play terrible.

(Above) Well said.

When people say that 'he played terrible', they mean compared to the usual and don't say 'well they should say that then' because at the end of the day it is just common interpretation - you shouldn't need everything spelled out for you for it to be justified.
What I Play:
Wilson Mini Stand Bag | PING G10, 10.5°, Proforce V2 HL S | PING G5, 15°, 18°, Aldila NV 75 S | PING G5, 19°, Aldila VS Proto By You 80 S
Mizuno MX200 4-PW S | Ping Tour W 50/12 X | Ping Tour W 58/TS X | A selection of putters, all 35.5 inches.

Posted
This reminded me of something...Quick story.

The other day, when Sergio had a bad round at The Barclay's (Fri., 2nd rd) my friend text messages me. "Dude, what happened to Sergio?!" "He sucks, he played terrible!"

First of all, I am not his caddie. I don't know "what happened" to him. He just didn't play good. What kind of question is that?! Second, he didn't play terrible. He shot a 76, on a tough golf course, in bad weather. So what? He didn't have the greatest of days. Now all of a sudden he sucks.

Some fans are just idiots.

Driver Ping G10 10.5*
Hybrids Ping G5 (3) 19* Bridgestone J36 (4) 22*
Irons Mizuno MP-57 5-PW
Wedges Srixon WG-504 52.08 Bridgestone WC Copper 56.13
Putter 33" Scotty Cameron Studio Select #2


Posted
  mirv said:
it just burns my biscuits and i wish people would choose their words a little more accurately.

I agree some people are speaking before they think concerning poor performance by a tour player. But you'll see this problem with the expectations of fans with top players of any sporting event, from armchair golfers to armchair quarterbacks. People can exaggerate the significance of outcomes of the player's actions.

If the player does well at an event then the fan's perspective that the player is great and will continue to be a great player is reinforced. But if the same player does something human and makes a few mistakes that could cost the tournament then the fan's perspective of this awesome, dominating player is crushed, and the fan is left questioning their beliefs and expectations of the losing player. But I don't mind the fans being too critical, as I think it contributes to making professional golf more dramatic. Imagine if fans didn't react at all when a top player plays poorly, where would the excitement be in that?

2011 Goals:
* Improve club-head speed to 90 mph with the driver
* Ensure increased speed does not compromise accuracy
* Prevent overextending on the back-swing (left-arm is bending too much at the top)
* Relax arms initially at address ( too tense)* Play more full rounds (failed from 2010)


Posted
Keep in mind being a pro doesn't mean they are immune from sore muscles, insomnia, nights, family problems, confidence problems, the yipps, upset stomach, uncomfortable beds, hangovers, previous night producing heat between the sheets, or maybe just sick of golf and in need a vacation, all of which can affect their game. Yes they are pros, but they are human also, not machines. Great pitchers have been pulled in the first inning. Great hitters go 0-4.

Not only that but I bet if most us had to play their courses, from their distances, their rough, their greens, with their competition, we'd be amazed how good that "bad" round really was.

PrairieParson
From Lubbock, Texas: the Heart of Flyover Country.
Ping G-15 Driver 12 deg.
Mizuno MP-33 Irons
Ball: White, mostly round and lots of dimplesScores this year: 78


Posted
If you talked to any pro who shot a +5 round, he'd be the first one to tell YOU "I played terribly!"

Driver: Nike Ignite 10.5 w/ Fujikura Motore F1
2H: King Cobra
4H: Nickent 4DX
5H: Adams A3
6I 7I 8I 9I PW: Mizuno mp-57Wedges: Mizuno MP T-10 50, 54, 58 Ball: random


Posted
  iWALK18 said:
I know just what you mean... every time I hear someone say "He played terrible" I almost can't keep myself from correcting him... it should be "He played

I was expecting a grammar thread as well.

Mizuno MP600 driver, Cleveland '09 Launcher 3-wood, Callaway FTiz 18 degree hybrid, Cleveland TA1 3-9, Scratch SS8620 47, 53, 58, Cleveland Classic 2 mid-mallet, Bridgestone B330S, Sun Mountain four5.


Posted
I think that Prairie Parson is an enabler.

When you say that a pro plays terribly it's taken in context. Much the same way as if you say you play well, it means relative to your ability and expectations.

Note: This thread is 5826 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

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

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

    Coupon Codes (save 10-20%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack/FitForGolf, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope. 15% off TourStriker (no code).
  • Posts

    • Wordle 1,517 5/6* ⬛🟦⬛🟧⬛ ⬛⬛⬛🟧🟦 ⬛⬛🟧🟧⬛ ⬛⬛🟧🟧🟧 🟧🟧🟧🟧🟧
    • He’s got to be the best player that’s never won a PGA-tournament these days.
    • Day 3 (August 13).  4' putting drill;  this is a modified version of the drill from LSW for short putting.   For context, in 2025, my strokes lost putting is more than 2 per round compared to the 15 handicap baseline, just on putts under 10'.  So that's a glaring weakness I think.  Anyway, so I set up 12 markers around a hole like a clockface, all coins, all face up.  I putt from each in turn, if I make it, I flip a heads over (or pick up if it's tails).  This means I have to make 24 putts eventually, ideally quickly.  It took me 38 attempts to do this, although 9 of the 12 coins were picked up either in the first or second go around.   Anyway, the baseline for a "90-golfer" (per Broadie description) is 37 attempts, so that's pretty good, but I'll keep trying to improve.  For anyone thinking about this, the number would be 30 for an average scratch player.   This was done on a real green at a nearby course's practice area. 
    • Day 18: a little under the weather, so just some mirror work while watching TV. 
    • That's not the right way to look at it, because you're not going to have a rating of 55 or something for even a 6500-yard par 72. There's a minimum rating (depending on the length), and then +s and -s to that. If a course has a bunch of +s and -s that even out, that doesn't mean the course rating is 100% the length. And what kind of math would it be if the course rating was lower than the formula: 103% length? 🙂 
×
×
  • 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...