Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
IGNORED

This is why you shouldn't make up your own rules.


Note: This thread is 4544 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

Hypothetical situation:

You're surfing the web about golf and you come across an article about a "World Junior Golf Championships" where there are numerous age brackets.

You discover that the winner of the under 10s shot 5 over par.

Further searching leads you to some video where you see these kids playing par 4s of 150 metres or less and Par 3s of 50 metres from "tees" planted in the middle of the fairways, miles from the real tees.

The kids are cute, they hit it nicely...that's not the point.

10 or 20 years later you read that (insert future  famous name here) "shot 5 over par in 2011 in the World Age Championships" with no asterisk or disclaimer.

Now.....does it make  you a "hater" when you say that that score is not legitimate?

Surely a 10 year old shooting 95 off proper tees is a genuine achievement, rather than some manufactured nonsense which actually devalues genuine achievement which is up for comparison.

This is why some people get pedantic about aces in practice rounds or eagles or whatever in dubious events or circumstances.

In the race of life, always back self-interest. At least you know it's trying.

 

 


Posted
Originally Posted by Shorty

Hypothetical situation:

You're surfing the web about golf and you come across an article about a "World Junior Golf Championships" where there are numerous age brackets.

You discover that the winner of the under 10s shot 5 over par.

Further searching leads you to some video where you see these kids playing par 4s of 150 metres or less and Par 3s of 50 metres from "tees" planted in the middle of the fairways, miles from the real tees.

The kids are cute, they hit it nicely...that's not the point.

10 or 20 years later you read that (insert future  famous name here) "shot 5 over par in 2011 in the World Age Championships" with no asterisk or disclaimer.

Now.....does it make  you a "hater" when you say that that score is not legitimate?

Surely a 10 year old shooting 95 off proper tees is a genuine achievement, rather than some manufactured nonsense which actually devalues genuine achievement which is up for comparison.

This is why some people get pedantic about aces in practice rounds or eagles or whatever in dubious events or circumstances.

Well, I will just say this.  Those 150 yard par 4s are probably pretty proportional to their ability and distances.  We had a 6 year old from ND that went and played in the world jr nationals for his age division.  He has a website and everything.  If you watch the videos he is playing 100-150 yard holes.  They even bragged about a 6 he carded on a 200 yard hole.  But when he can only hit 100 yards off the tee then a 150 yard hole makes sense as a par 4.

There kids, what does it matter.  They play on smaller football fields, smaller baseball diamonds, run shorter distances in track and cross country.  Why should they play 400 yard holes when they will take 4-5 shots to even get to the green.


Posted
Hypothetical situation: You're surfing the web about golf and you come across an article about a "World Junior Golf Championships" where there are numerous age brackets. You discover that the winner of the under 10s shot 5 over par. Further searching leads you to some video where you see these kids playing par 4s of 150 metres or less and Par 3s of 50 metres from "tees" planted in the middle of the fairways, miles from the real tees. The kids are cute, they hit it nicely...that's not the point. 10 or 20 years later you read that (insert future  famous name here) "shot 5 over par in 2011 in the World Age Championships" with no asterisk or disclaimer. Now.....does it make  you a "hater" when you say that that score is not legitimate? Surely a 10 year old shooting 95 off proper tees is a genuine achievement, rather than some manufactured nonsense which actually devalues genuine achievement which is up for comparison. This is why some people get pedantic about aces in practice rounds or eagles or whatever in dubious events or circumstances.

I see your point about par distances being age or ability dependent. However, I thought from standard men's tees that a consensus of male scratch golfers determines the par, and the same goes for the ladies tees.

:ping:  :tmade:  :callaway:   :gamegolf:  :titleist:

TM White Smoke Big Fontana; Pro-V1
TM Rac 60 TT WS, MD2 56
Ping i20 irons U-4, CFS300
Callaway XR16 9 degree Fujikura Speeder 565 S
Callaway XR16 3W 15 degree Fujikura Speeder 565 S, X2Hot Pro 20 degrees S

"I'm hitting the woods just great, but I'm having a terrible time getting out of them." ~Harry Toscano

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

While I think it's perfectly legitimate to be proud of winning in any head to head event, I don't think the tagline of someone shooting a score is worth claiming. Then again I place little importance on score without any context. 5 over par could be an incredible accomplishment or nothing special. For example, I shot "5 over" on the front 9 of a relatively standard course in a casual round. The winner of a British Open could also shoot 5 over for 18 on sunday on a day when no one breaks par due to 40mph wind.

I think there's also a big difference between junior and adult competitive golf. You never see grown players go through a total body change and need to relearn the game. There are plenty of players who are pretty average juniors that turn into incredible players due to the gift of athleticism. Then there are those who lose interest in the game or choose other sports. So success at that level really doesn't translate much to later in life. It's as much for the parents as anything, IMO. I certainly agree that a legitimate 95 from men's tees is a much better achievement, as it indicates the kid's skills will translate better than 5 over on a pitch and putt. No reason not to be proud of either, but the 95 shows much more potential to be excited about than the 5 over.

I also would like to add that teeing off from the middle of the fairways messes with the course design. Obviously forced carries over water are a bit unfair for 10 year olds hitting driver instead of a wedge, but the designer's plans are basically shot at that point.

In My Bag:

Adams Super LS 9.5˚ driver, Aldila Phenom NL 65TX
Adams Super LS 15˚ fairway, Kusala black 72x
Adams Super LS 18˚ fairway, Aldila Rip'd NV 75TX
Adams Idea pro VST hybrid, 21˚, RIP Alpha 105x
Adams DHY 24˚, RIP Alpha 89x
5-PW Maltby TE irons, KBS C taper X, soft stepped once 130g
Mizuno T4, 54.9 KBS Wedge X
Mizuno R12 60.5, black nickel, KBS Wedge X
Odyssey Metal X #1 putter 
Bridgestone E5, Adidas samba bag, True Linkswear Stealth
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
Originally Posted by trackster

There kids, what does it matter.  They play on smaller football fields, smaller baseball diamonds, run shorter distances in track and cross country.  Why should they play 400 yard holes when they will take 4-5 shots to even get to the green.

Exactly my point. You don't say they ran 100 metres in 9 seconds when they run 50 metres.

My point is that certain things in sport are absolute and of course you have categories and modified courts, etc. - but Tiger Woods shooting even par on  a par 72 course from the tips at age 11 is not the same as little Johnnie playing a par round on a course of 3000m.

When someone says "Did you know that he shot 5 over at such and such a course?", you have to think about what that actually means in terms of what constitutes a golf course. And I'm not suggesting 200m water carries for 8 year olds.

What I'm suggesting is that we stop dumbing down our sport to make every child feel like a prodigy and every hacker feel like he has something in common with the PGA tour guys.

In the race of life, always back self-interest. At least you know it's trying.

 

 


Posted
Originally Posted by Shorty

What I'm suggesting is that we stop dumbing down our sport to make every child feel like a prodigy and every hacker feel like he has something in common with the PGA tour guys.

I do not see any dumbing down in teeing from 150m mark for under 10 year olds.

Gladly you presented this as hypothetical situation....


Posted
Originally Posted by luu5

I do not see any dumbing down in teeing from 150m mark for under 10 year olds.

Gladly you presented this as hypothetical situation....

Probably better to read my original post in context.

Or should a 60 year old be boasting of the "hole in one" he had at age 7 (but not mention that it was from 50 yards)?

In the race of life, always back self-interest. At least you know it's trying.

 

 


Posted
Hypothetical situation: You're surfing the web about golf and you come across an article about a "World Junior Golf Championships" where there are numerous age brackets. You discover that the winner of the under 10s shot 5 over par. Further searching leads you to some video where you see these kids playing par 4s of 150 metres or less and Par 3s of 50 metres from "tees" planted in the middle of the fairways, miles from the real tees. The kids are cute, they hit it nicely...that's not the point. 10 or 20 years later you read that (insert future  famous name here) "shot 5 over par in 2011 in the World Age Championships" with no asterisk or disclaimer. Now.....does it make  you a "hater" when you say that that score is not legitimate? Surely a 10 year old shooting 95 off proper tees is a genuine achievement, rather than some manufactured nonsense which actually devalues genuine achievement which is up for comparison. This is why some people get pedantic about aces in practice rounds or eagles or whatever in dubious events or circumstances.

Okay, it all makes sense to me now why the scratch or close to scratch players argued over the legitimacy of a certain claim. I suppose its because the better a player you are, the better you know the rules because even one stroke can mean a very large percentage of how much you were over par.

:ping:  :tmade:  :callaway:   :gamegolf:  :titleist:

TM White Smoke Big Fontana; Pro-V1
TM Rac 60 TT WS, MD2 56
Ping i20 irons U-4, CFS300
Callaway XR16 9 degree Fujikura Speeder 565 S
Callaway XR16 3W 15 degree Fujikura Speeder 565 S, X2Hot Pro 20 degrees S

"I'm hitting the woods just great, but I'm having a terrible time getting out of them." ~Harry Toscano

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
Originally Posted by Shorty

Probably better to read my original post in context.

Or should a 60 year old be boasting of the "hole in one" he had at age 7 (but not mention that it was from 50 yards)?

At age 60, most people are judged by what they have done later in life. If he has holed out (from 50 meters), so what, nobody probably thinks that he has wasted his talent if he has not been playing on Tour.


Posted

Surely golfers at the highest levels don't spend any time worrying about any perception that a kid (or one of us) is actually close to their level by the scores we shoot.

I admit that some of the non-golfing public doesn't have a clue (I've had to explain to a couple of people that our 72s or 73s are a world apart from those scores in a US Open).

They shorten Little League fields (and even put the ball on a tee for the really young ones), lower basketball goals, and play with smaller footballs (and have weight limits for backs so the other kids don't get killed) to make the games more playable and more fun. It keeps the kids in the game and helps in learning correct mechanics. It's up to the public to understand that those 20 home runs on a Little League field, against Little League pitching mean nothing more than that a kid had a good year in Little League. That same kid may not even be a starter by the time he gets in high school (much less higher up than that).

Same for golf.


Posted
I don't see a problem with it...

Oh well, why not just call everyone a scratch player and adjust the course length to accommodate this? Let's just make the mechanism for differentiating one for equalizing in a way that works against the purpose of e handicap?

In the race of life, always back self-interest. At least you know it's trying.

 

 


Posted

Originally Posted by Shorty

Quote:

Originally Posted by trackster

There kids, what does it matter.  They play on smaller football fields, smaller baseball diamonds, run shorter distances in track and cross country.  Why should they play 400 yard holes when they will take 4-5 shots to even get to the green.

Exactly my point. You don't say they ran 100 metres in 9 seconds when they run 50 metres.

My point is that certain things in sport are absolute and of course you have categories and modified courts, etc. - but Tiger Woods shooting even par on  a par 72 course from the tips at age 11 is not the same as little Johnnie playing a par round on a course of 3000m.

When someone says "Did you know that he shot 5 over at such and such a course?", you have to think about what that actually means in terms of what constitutes a golf course. And I'm not suggesting 200m water carries for 8 year olds.

What I'm suggesting is that we stop dumbing down our sport to make every child feel like a prodigy and every hacker feel like he has something in common with the PGA tour guys.

Then we should call any score from anything other than the pro tees an *score? Golf is set up to negotiate for abilities. Anyone that uses a forward tee could be looked at in the same light. Scoring is scoring regardless. Aces are aces because of the hole, mindset and you only get one try. If your swings are full you have to control them just like any other age bracket. The score may not reflect the difficulty of navigating hazards as much but we don't sit on this forum and talk about 3-11 year old golfers UNLESS they shoot an amazing round on a full length golf course or maybe get two aces in a round and someone with any clout witnessed the endeavor.

  • Upvote 1

"My ball is on top of a rock in the hazard, do I get some sort of relief?"

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
Originally Posted by Shorty

Quote:

Originally Posted by indyvai

I don't see a problem with it...

Oh well, why not just call everyone a scratch player and adjust the course length to accommodate this? Let's just make the mechanism for differentiating one for equalizing in a way that works against the purpose of e handicap?

When you say things like this it makes me wonder just how mean spirited you really are.  I know it's your style to be a bit of an ass here, but we are talking about kids under the age of 10.  Kids who weigh in at 50 pounds (22.6 kilos) or less.  I guess you'd just prefer that they not start the game until they are in their teens so they can play on a course which you might approve of.  And obviously none of my lifetime accomplishments mean anything either since I've played 99% of my golf from other tees than the tips.  What a large head you must have.

To Trackster:  I know a kid like the one you posted about (my last supervisor at work before I retired is his grandfather).  He too has a website.  He was on Good Morning America with Diane Sawyer when he was 3, and has been pretty much tearing up the Colorado junior golf scene ever since he was old enough to be allowed to compete.  This is his website - Brayden Bozak .  Bray is the biggest golf nut I've ever met.  This is a photo of him hitting balls off his Grandpa's patio at age 4 - you can see what I mean.

  • Upvote 1

Rick

"He who has the fastest cart will never have a bad lie."

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
Quote:

Further searching leads you to some video where you see these kids playing par 4s of 150 metres or less and Par 3s of 50 metres from "tees" planted in the middle of the fairways, miles from the real tees.

The kids are cute, they hit it nicely...that's not the point.

So if there were 'actual' tee boxes that reflected the yardage the kids played, call them preteen or super junior tees, then your problem with the score disappears?  I mean if a 10 year old in little league bats .625 you don't honestly compare that batting average to a major league average, do you?

In My Bag:

 

Irons: 2-SW Golfsmith MB Forged S300's & 60 degree Callaway

Putter: 20 year old rusty Cameron no clue what model

Woods: 1 & 3 Cheap Ass Walter Hagen Stiff Grafalloy $30 per club lol


Posted

I have another scenario for you.  I have a son who is almost 7.  We go play a course that he can play the entire course from the red tees, (only three sets).  His best score this year is 104, he wants to break 100 before going back to school.  If he does, there will be much celebration and I will consider it quite an accomplishment for him.

The last time we played the course, I shot 68.  3 under from the tips.  Is that an accomplishment for me?  Sure, I have only been on the 60's a couple of times in my life and the last time was probably 15 years ago.

Now I will tell you the course has a slope of 113 and a rating of 70.

I will also tell you, ZERO bunkers, completely flat, little OB and only one hole with water that really doesn't come into play.

I will also tell you the course is 5300 yards from the tips.

So does Dad brag about a 68 on this course, NO I do not,

Will Dad brag when his 6 year old son breaks 100 from the reds on this course, DAMN right because the course is STILL to long for him from the Reds.

  • Upvote 1

In My Bag:

 

Irons: 2-SW Golfsmith MB Forged S300's & 60 degree Callaway

Putter: 20 year old rusty Cameron no clue what model

Woods: 1 & 3 Cheap Ass Walter Hagen Stiff Grafalloy $30 per club lol


Posted

First off, the rules clearly allow for and accept a variety of tee boxes, so I don't see that varying tees according to ability is the equivalent of "making up your own rules"......

Beyond that though, I'm perfectly fine with people playing the tees that best suit their abilities.  Scratch that......I prefer that people play the tees that best suit their abilities.  Regardless of age or gender.

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

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
Originally Posted by Fourputt

When you say things like this it makes me wonder just how mean spirited you really are.  I know it's your style to be a bit of an ass here, but we are talking about kids under the age of 10.  Kids who weigh in at 50 pounds (22.6 kilos) or less.  I guess you'd just prefer that they not start the game until they are in their teens so they can play on a course which you might approve of.  And obviously none of my lifetime accomplishments mean anything either since I've played 99% of my golf from other tees than the tips.  What a large head you must have.

Once again -  someone responds without even thinking about the point I am making.

Why is it that  whenever there is an attempt at a philosophical discussion, there are knee-jerk reactions which deflect the argument and make it out that people are attacking kids or trying to take away the enjoyment of the game?

I am actually talking about people levelling the playing field to the point where everyone is seen as a prodigy or an accomplished player. Or at least trying to talk about the achievements of players with some fairness.

My post has nothing at all to do with kids playing and loving the game.

Look up a British documentary called "Trophy Kids" - and in particular look at "The Wolf", Lee Spurling.

Better stil, check out his appalling father, who thinks that at a certain age, his son was more accomplished than Tiger.

He's showing him the Ferraris he's going to be buying and trying to place bets on his son winning a major by the age of 21, and thinks the bookmakers are scared of him.

In the race of life, always back self-interest. At least you know it's trying.

 

 


Note: This thread is 4544 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
    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

    • Day 1: 2025.12.26 Worked on LH position on grip, trying to keep fingers closer to perpendicular to the club. Feels awkward but change is meant to.
    • Please see this topic for updated information:
    • Please see this topic for updated information:
    • When you've been teaching golf as long as I have, you're going to find that you can teach some things better than you previously had, and you're probably going to find some things that you taught incorrectly. I don't see that as a bad thing — what would be worse is refusing to adapt and grow given new information. I've always said that my goal with my instruction isn't to be right, but it's to get things right. To that end, I'm about five years late in issuing a public proclamation on something… When I first got my GEARS system, I immediately looked at the golf swings of the dozens and dozens of Tour players for which I suddenly had full 3D data. I created a huge spreadsheet showing how their bodies moved, how the club moved, at various points in the swing. I mapped knee and elbow angles, hand speeds, shoulder turns and pelvis turns… etc. I re-considered what I thought I knew about the golf swing as performed by the best players. One of those things dated back to the earliest days: that you extend (I never taught "straighten" and would avoid using that word unless in the context of saying "don't fully straighten") the trail knee/leg in the backswing. I was mislead by 2D photos from less-than-ideal camera angles — the trail leg rotates a bit during the backswing, and so when observing trail knee flex should also use a camera that moves to stay perpendicular to the plane of the ankle/knee/hip joint. We have at least two topics here on this (here and here; both of which I'll be updating after publishing this) where @mvmac and I advise golfers to extend the trail knee. Learning that this was not right is one of the reasons I'm glad to have a 3D system, as most golfers generally preserve the trail knee flex throughout the backswing. Data Here's a video showing an iron and a driver of someone who has won the career slam: Here's what the graph of his right knee flex looks like. The solid lines I've positioned at the top of the backswing (GEARS aligns both swings at impact, the dashed line). Address is to the right, of course, and the graph shows knee flex from the two swings above. The data (17.56° and 23.20°) shows where this player is in both swings (orange being the yellow iron swing, pink the blue driver swing). You can see that this golfer extends his trail knee 2-3°… before bending it even more than that through the late backswing and early downswing. Months ago I created a quick Instagram video showing the trail knee flex in the backswing of several players (see the top for the larger number): Erik J. Barzeski (@iacas) • Instagram reel GEARS shares expert advice on golf swing technique, focusing on the critical backswing phase. Tour winners and major champions reveal the key to a precise and powerful swing, highlighting the importance of... Here are a few more graphs. Two LIV players and major champions: Two PGA Tour winners: Two women's #1 ranked players: Two more PGA Tour winners (one a major champ): Two former #1s, the left one being a woman, the right a man, with a driver: Two more PGA Tour players: You'll notice a trend: they almost all maintain roughly the same flex throughout their backswing and downswing. The Issues with Extending the Trail Knee You can play good golf extending (again, not "straightening") the trail knee. Some Tour players do. But, as with many things, if 95 out of 100 Tour players do it, you're most likely better off doing similarly to what they do. So, what are the issues with extending the trail knee in the backswing? To list a few: Pelvic Depth and Rotation Quality Suffers When the trail knee extends, the trail leg often acts like an axle on the backswing, with the pelvis rotating around the leg and the trail hip joint. This prevents the trail side from gaining depth, as is needed to keep the pelvis center from thrusting toward the ball. Most of the "early extension" (thrust) that I see occurs during the backswing. Encourages Early Extension (Thrust) Patterns When you've thrust and turned around the trail hip joint in the backswing, you often thrust a bit more in the downswing as the direction your pelvis is oriented is forward and "out" (to the right for a righty). Your trail leg can abduct to push you forward, but "forward" when your pelvis is turned like that is in the "thrust" direction. Additionally, the trail knee "breaking" again at the start of the downswing often jumps the trail hip out toward the ball a bit too much or too quickly. While the trail hip does move in that direction, if it's too fast or too much, it can prevent the lead side hip from getting "back" at the right rate, or at a rate commensurate with the trail hip to keep the pelvis center from thrusting. Disrupts the Pressure Shift/Transition When the trail leg extends too much, it often can't "push" forward normally. The forward push begins much earlier than forward motion begins — pushing forward begins as early as about P1.5 to P2 in the swings of most good golfers. It can push forward by abducting, again, but that's a weaker movement that shoves the pelvis forward (toward the target) and turns it more than it generally should (see the next point). Limits Internal Rotation of the Trail Hip Internal rotation of the trail hip is a sort of "limiter" on the backswing. I have seen many golfers on GEARS whose trail knee extends, whose pelvis shifts forward (toward the target), and who turn over 50°, 60°, and rarely but not never, over 70° in the backswing. If you turn 60° in the backswing, it's going to be almost impossible to get "open enough" in the downswing to arrive at a good impact position. Swaying/Lateral Motion Occasionally a golfer who extends the trail knee too much will shift back too far, but more often the issue is that the golfer will shift forward too early in the backswing (sometimes even immediately to begin the backswing), leaving them "stuck forward" to begin the downswing. They'll push forward, stop, and have to restart around P4, disrupting the smooth sequence often seen in the game's best players. Other Bits… Reduces ground reaction force potential, compromises spine inclination and posture, makes transition sequencing harder, increases stress on the trail knee and lower back… In short… It's not athletic. We don't do many athletic things with "straight" or very extended legs (unless it's the end of the action, like a jump or a big push off like a step in a running motion).
    • Day 135 12-25 Wide backswing to wide downswing drill. Recorder and used mirror. 
×
×
  • 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.