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 4545 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
Originally Posted by cda77

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?

If a Little League baseball player was batting .625, that would be great. It's when he's batting .125 and someone calls it .625 that would be a problem. And in the context of his age.

But when someone says "x shot x at age x", with no qualification it's different.

When someone says that Tiger Woods shot 71 at age 11 I'm assuming it was from regulation tees, not a couple of upturned buckets placed halfway down the fairway. I prefer to compare apples with apples. Clearly, some apples are a lot better than others, which is the point.

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

 

 


Posted
Umm... Pretty sure all golf is based off the appropriate tees for your skill level... A pro would laugh at your tee locations too. So yes, if your 6, 150 yards on a par 4 is respectable.

Posted
Originally Posted by clutchshot

Umm... Pretty sure all golf is based off the appropriate tees for your skill level... A pro would laugh at your tee locations too. So yes, if your 6, 150 yards on a par 4 is respectable.

I give up.

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

 

 


Posted
I think some of you guys are misinterpreting what Shorty is saying here, or he's not explaining it well enough. He's not saying that kids (or even take "children" out of it, if you want) shouldn't play 150-yard holes, or that we should shame them for it. Just that for comparison's sake, it would be good to know that the great score was done an an atypical golf course. For example, when I was a kid playing Little League, we played on one field that had shorter fences than the rest. One year, my only home run came at that smaller field. I didn't go around talking about my "amazing moon-ball home run," because I knew it was at the small field, and might not have made it out of the bigger fields. I certainly didn't try to pass it out as a hit that would have cleared the green monster at Fenway. He's saying that if we're going to grade on a curve, we should at least all be aware that we're grading on a curve. I don't think he's trying to be mean-spirited here.

In my bag:

Driver: Titleist TSi3 | 15º 3-Wood: Ping G410 | 17º 2-Hybrid: Ping G410 | 19º 3-Iron: TaylorMade GAPR Lo |4-PW Irons: Nike VR Pro Combo | 54º SW, 60º LW: Titleist Vokey SM8 | Putter: Odyssey Toulon Las Vegas H7

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator
Posted
Originally Posted by jamo

I think some of you guys are misinterpreting what Shorty is saying here, or he's not explaining it well enough. He's not saying that kids (or even take "children" out of it, if you want) shouldn't play 150-yard holes, or that we should shame them for it. Just that for comparison's sake, it would be good to know that the great score was done an an atypical golf course.

For example, when I was a kid playing Little League, we played on one field that had shorter fences than the rest. One year, my only home run came at that smaller field. I didn't go around talking about my "amazing moon-ball home run," because I knew it was at the small field, and might not have made it out of the bigger fields. I certainly didn't try to pass it out as a hit that would have cleared the green monster at Fenway.

He's saying that if we're going to grade on a curve, we should at least all be aware that we're grading on a curve.

I don't think he's trying to be mean-spirited here.

Yes, please read that.

My kid played in a scramble the other day with three other sucky kids. They used all but one of her shots (and only used the other girl's because they didn't have to walk as far to get to it). As a group they shot 27.

It was six holes, albeit from the actual red tees. The "pars" are 4, 4, 3, 3, 3, 4 and the holes were 175-235 yards or so, but still - if it was written up in the paper that she shot 27 at JC Martin, most people would assume that she played all nine holes (par 32) and not just six (par 21).

Similar thing. Hell, she might break par and shoot "-1" if they played the "pink tees" that they often let the worse 9 and 10 year olds play. But you and I would know she didn't really shoot "one under par." 20 would be really darn good for six holes of golf (hell, I'm not sure I'd better 20 - like most dinky courses the greens are tiny and yet tilted heck), but it wouldn't compare to someone even playing from the red tees. It'd be really good for a 10-year-old.

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

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
I give up. :loco:

Please don't.

: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
I played in a tournament here the other day. I shot a 73 on 18 holes. Everyone was proud of me for breaking 80. I was not too excited because the tees were moved forward a lot on the par 4 and par 5 holes. I think if we played from the blue tees I would have scored high 80s or low 90s. For me, the 73 is not a real score.

Posted
Originally Posted by jga226

I played in a tournament here the other day. I shot a 73 on 18 holes. Everyone was proud of me for breaking 80. I was not too excited because the tees were moved forward a lot on the par 4 and par 5 holes. I think if we played from the blue tees I would have scored high 80s or low 90s. For me, the 73 is not a real score.

Why not?  What if those par 4 and 5s were the distances at the blue tees?  What if they were the distances from the tips?  I was watching the Scottish open today and there was a par 4 337 yard hole that pros were reaching the green with irons.  Did the pros think that they should call it a par 3 because it can be reached with an iron?  I would think not.

Look up pebble beach golf course.  Hole #2 plays as a par 5 on normal days (Par 4 in the U.S. open).  From the gold tees (2nd farthest back) it plays 460 yards.  From the white tees (where 90% of players should play from) it plays at 428 yards.  So here we have it.  One of the greatest golf courses in the world has a par 5 that plays 460 from one tee and 423 from the tees that most people should play.  If some one drops a two on pebble beach #2 from the gold or white tees are we going to call it an eagle?  No.


Posted

If everyone that kid's playing against is playing under the same guidelines I don't see an issue.  I mean, if some kid gets labeled as a "prodigy" by his loser dad I could care less.  IMO, kids that small should be playing those distances, it keeps them motivated.  I know I wouldn't have fun playing what felt like a 800 yard par 4.


Posted

For what it's worth, I would be more able to appreciate a 95 from the forward tees from a 10 year old rather than trying to guess where the tee boxes were, teeing off from drop zone on par 3, etc.  It would obviously be easier for comparison to a grown male golfer.

That being said, of course they move these kids up!! Who wants to volunteer at an event where there would surely be 6-7 hour rounds from these kids setting up and hitting 4 separate approach shots from the tees.  Myself as a 10 year old I imagine would not be happy hearing "another double bogey, great job Sport."

Let me also say that I know many golfers that wouldn't be able to net +5 on 18 holes even if they started par 4's from the 150 and par 5's from 180.

Let the boys play!!

Edit: Now to respond to the OP's actual intent with regards to the media blurring the score: yes, it is entirely misleading for the media to report the kid as a prodigy etc.  But that's what the media is: sensationalism.  I agree that saying a 9 year old shot 73 on such and such golf course is ridiculous.  They should "asterisk" or preface the story with "from modified tee box locations giving little Junior a big bump, he managed to shoot XX on XX and win the X tournament in his age bracket.  Junior's course played to XX yards, compared to XX yards from the regulation tees."  But again that's a media issue and turns a (misleading) big hit story into basically reporting on the normal ongoings at a junior golf tournament


Posted
Originally Posted by Shorty

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.


Except you are not trying to have a philosophical discussion. You are stacking an argument to make your point. If you want to specifically discuss dumbing down achievements to keep kids happy then have that discussion. Complaining about a 10 year old playing a 3000 yard course and shooting a good score is a different argument.

  • Upvote 1
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
Originally Posted by trackster

Why not?  What if those par 4 and 5s were the distances at the blue tees?  What if they were the distances from the tips?  I was watching the Scottish open today and there was a par 4 337 yard hole that pros were reaching the green with irons.  Did the pros think that they should call it a par 3 because it can be reached with an iron?  I would think not.

Look up pebble beach golf course.  Hole #2 plays as a par 5 on normal days (Par 4 in the U.S. open).  From the gold tees (2nd farthest back) it plays 460 yards.  From the white tees (where 90% of players should play from) it plays at 428 yards.  So here we have it.  One of the greatest golf courses in the world has a par 5 that plays 460 from one tee and 423 from the tees that most people should play.  If some one drops a two on pebble beach #2 from the gold or white tees are we going to call it an eagle?  No.


And yardages are not the sole determinant of the difficulty of a hole. I've not played PB but that hole may be uphill and play longer. 14 at PB is consistently one of the hardest Par 5's in golf. It plays 580 from the US Open tees which by modern standards is not extremely long but it's uphill and the green is tiny.

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
If everyone that kid's playing against is playing under the same guidelines I don't see an issue.  I mean, if some kid gets labeled as a "prodigy" by his loser dad I could care less.  IMO, kids that small should be playing those distances, it keeps them motivated.  I know I wouldn't have fun playing what felt like a 800 yard par 4.

This weekend, my 15 year old nephew got his butt handed to him by a 7 year old kid. My nephew played from the blue tees, while the little kid played from the orange kids tees. Their coach was trying to play head games with my nephew and another 15 year old. The other 15 year old played a 13 year old girl. The boyis a 10 hc solid and the girl is a 2 hc from the ladies tees. He barely tied her. Even tough they played different tees, it was tough for them to swallow the defeat. I'm sure the coaches will play more head games wih them. I just need to get my nephew on the course more. Hope he gets over it, and can take more of these.

: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
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?

Did I catch a 9er in there?


Posted
Originally Posted by Valleygolfer

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.

You contradicted your own point.  Golf is set up to negotiate for abilities.  So when a person of a particular ability plays a hole at a designated par/distance that is NOT for their abilities, their score in relation to par is devalued.  I'm completely shocked that this basic, fundamental norm of golf is being circumvented/ignored all for the sake of giving a pat-on-the-back to a guy who got an "albatross" in a scramble event.

And let's remember that this wasn't simply a "forward tee."

Brandon a.k.a. Tony Stark

-------------------------

The Fastest Flip in the West


Posted

Originally Posted by bplewis24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Valleygolfer

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.

You contradicted your own point.  Golf is set up to negotiate for abilities.  So when a person of a particular ability plays a hole at a designated par/distance that is NOT for their abilities, their score in relation to par is devalued.  I'm completely shocked that this basic, fundamental norm of golf is being circumvented/ignored all for the sake of giving a pat-on-the-back to a guy who got an "albatross" in a scramble event.

And let's remember that this wasn't simply a "forward tee."

I don't think that I contradicted my point. I stated that it was and that if we looked at juniors score as not legit we would have to do the same for anyone using forward tees IF we used that stance.

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

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

I don't think there needs to be an astericks or a disclaimor because the holes were short.  If the holes are appropriate length for the players age, then it's a legit score.  On the other hand, if a 10 year old shot par from the tips . .then that fact should be highlighted.  That would be the difference between being a future scratch golfer . .of which there are many and nobody particularly cares . . .and being the "next Tiger Woods", lol.


Posted
Don't give up. I think the point is, there are no losers. And if that is the case, then there are no winners. For the sake of their emotions? "World needs plenty of bartenders!"

Note: This thread is 4545 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.