Jump to content
IGNORED

Brandel Gives Tiger an F/ Tiger's Agent Hints at Legal Action Against Chamblee


Valleygolfer
Note: This thread is 3787 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

Why can Chamblee have an opinion on Tiger that affects his career but we can't have an opinion on Chamblee and call for his job.  I don't like him or his methods for getting attention.  As a viewer, in a key demographic, of the GC I'd prefer he not be given a platform to spew his garbage from, that's my opinion.

Sure, you can call for his job ... but I carefully read Brandel's comments - he gives Tiger praise and also questions his ethics. I would have written the same article with a different slant but Brandel is Brandel. I think he is encouraged to be the growling dog, because if anyone can get away with it, a former player has more credibility.

Brandel once bothered me, too, but I was a bit of a TIger homer -- I like to see player greatness. Tiger has lost me, and I don't mind hearing Brandel going after him in an honest manner - and I think Brandel's comments are honest to him -- there was sufficient evidence of Tiger's acts that would cause one to do more than scratch their head and say "Whassup with that?" If there was not, I think most of us would be after Brandel.  The fact that many of us accept Brandel's comments as valid says a lot about Tiger's actions during the year. Personally, I think Tiger looked frustrated and pressured, and when that happens, you may take certain actions that you later regret. It's human nature.

Ping G400 Max 9/TPT Shaft, TEE EX10 Beta 4, 5 wd, PXG 22 HY, Mizuno JPX919F 5-GW, TItleist SM7 Raw 55-09, 59-11, Bettinardi BB39

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Replies 761
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I like Brandel's grading system, you can get as high as an A++ because you have a hot wife

I think this says it all.

Dufner's bride is hot and All-America looking :-*

Tiger's GF is hot yet nasty looking :censored: ... that nastiness gives Tiger away..

:-$

Ping G400 Max 9/TPT Shaft, TEE EX10 Beta 4, 5 wd, PXG 22 HY, Mizuno JPX919F 5-GW, TItleist SM7 Raw 55-09, 59-11, Bettinardi BB39

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator
Suing Brandel is ridiculous. It won't happen, because any lawyer good enough to get Tiger as a client will undoubtedly know that Brandel's actions weren't libelous.

It's worth pointing out, perhaps, that Steinberg studied law (I don't think he ever practiced it per se) at University of Illinois.

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Sure, you can call for his job ... but I carefully read Brandel's comments - he gives Tiger praise and also questions his ethics. I would have written the same article with a different slant but Brandel is Brandel. I think he is encouraged to be the growling dog, because if anyone can get away with it, a former player has more credibility.

Brandel once bothered me, too, but I was a bit of a TIger homer -- I like to see player greatness. Tiger has lost me, and I don't mind hearing Brandel going after him in an honest manner - and I think Brandel's comments are honest to him -- there was sufficient evidence of Tiger's acts that would cause one to do more than scratch their head and say "Whassup with that?" If there was not, I think most of us would be after Brandel.  The fact that many of us accept Brandel's comments as valid says a lot about Tiger's actions during the year. Personally, I think Tiger looked frustrated and pressured, and when that happens, you may take certain actions that you later regret. It's human nature.

I'm more in the Phil camp than Tiger.  I respect and appreciate what Tiger has done for the game of golf.  I don't care what he's done in his personal life, it has no impact on me whatsoever nor anyone else unless they are friends or family of Tiger and Elin.

Brandel can say anything he wants about Tigers swing, coach, putting or approach to the game but when you question a persons ethics you step over the line, especially in golf.  I'm surprised you buy into Brandel's smokescreen.  Giving a person praise before you stab them in the back is what someone does when they want to look unbiased, it's a ploy.  You see it all the time in politics, it inauthentic and a method used by Brendel and Miceli to avoid simply being dismissed as Tiger haters.

If Brandel has issues with the ethics, he should contact the USGA, PGA Tour and Tournament Rules committees and find out why he was just penalized strokes and not DQ'ed or suspended.  Tiger followed the rules and accepted the penalties, he's likely not the only one to be assigned stroke penalties this year but he's the most famous so Brandel puts the cross-hairs on him because no one cares that the guy ranked 120 (random number) had some rules violations too.

I'd like to see Tiger sue Brandel, even if he loses it might make Brandel think twice when he writes an article that puts into question a golfers ethics and integrity.

Joe Paradiso

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Sure, you can call for his job ... but I carefully read Brandel's comments - he gives Tiger praise and also questions his ethics. I would have written the same article with a different slant but Brandel is Brandel. I think he is encouraged to be the growling dog, because if anyone can get away with it, a former player has more credibility.

Brandel once bothered me, too, but I was a bit of a TIger homer -- I like to see player greatness. Tiger has lost me, and I don't mind hearing Brandel going after him in an honest manner - and I think Brandel's comments are honest to him -- there was sufficient evidence of Tiger's acts that would cause one to do more than scratch their head and say "Whassup with that?" If there was not, I think most of us would be after Brandel.  The fact that many of us accept Brandel's comments as valid says a lot about Tiger's actions during the year. Personally, I think Tiger looked frustrated and pressured, and when that happens, you may take certain actions that you later regret. It's human nature.

The problem with what Brandel said is that he drew a DIRECT LINE between Tiger's actions and his own little story about how HE cheated.  That was not a "wassup with that" comment.  The crossed out 100 replaced with an F is an implicit (and maybe explicit) charge of cheating.

But then again, what the hell do I know?

Rich - in name only

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Brandel should worry less about Tiger and more about his own marriages-Plural. I think he's been through three wives now.

"The expert golfer has maximum time to make minimal compensations. The poorer player has minimal time to make maximum compensations." - And no, I'm not Mac. Please do not PM me about it. I just think he is a crazy MFer and we could all use a little more crazy sometimes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Brandel should worry less about Tiger and more about his own marriages-Plural. I think he's been through three wives now.

Probably because he critiques them as he does Tiger

Ping G400 Max 9/TPT Shaft, TEE EX10 Beta 4, 5 wd, PXG 22 HY, Mizuno JPX919F 5-GW, TItleist SM7 Raw 55-09, 59-11, Bettinardi BB39

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Brandel is really, really good at his current job.  Maybe he leans a little too far towards the Limbaugh/O'Reilly style for a lot of people's liking - he wasn't very subtle in saying he thinks Tiger cheated** - but he creates buzz, and that's good for his employers. ** I don't care that he gave Tiger an F because of his controversies, but he flat-out called him a cheater, and I don't think that is really fair at all.

Well said. That's pretty much exactly what I wanted to say :D

:titleist: 913 D2 w/ Oban Kiyoshi Purple :ping: G25 3 Wood w/ Graphite Design Tour AD-DJ6 :titleist: 913H 21* w/ Diamana Blue :ping: G25 4 - PW :vokey: SM4 Oil Can - 52, 56, 60 :cameron: Studio Select Newport 2 :golflogix: :bushnell: Tour V3

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I'm glad that Chamblee said this.

For a start, it triggered the "How dare you, we'll sue" reflex from Tiger's camp. Now, what other Nike sponsored athlete does that call to mind?

Whether or not you agree with Chamblee's conclusions - you'll probably agree that there is no shortage of commentators who would not be willing to publicly state that opinion of Tiger. That's not a healthy situation. Unless of course you think that health is all about outward appearances...

Chamblee, intentionally or unintentionally, perhaps even for the worst of motives, is helping bring a bit of balance to golf coverage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


One of the better assessments I have read. Tiger obviously is not a cheater. But he could have handled things better, especially at the Masters.

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/blogs/bunker-mentality/woods-guilty-being-ignorant-obtuse-unprofessional-not-cheating-143239450.html

But is Chamblee right? Will 2013 be remembered as much for Woods' brush with officialdom as his five Tour wins and returning to the lofty spot of world number one? “I can’t remember another year when it’s happened like this," said Woods himself about his brush with rules officials.

Bunker Mentality decided to look back at his big blunders of the year:

- His most contentious moment of the year enveloped him at the Masters in April when he saw a ball clip a pin before dropping back into the water. Woods should have dropped the ball from where he had hit or on line of entry, but opted to go back a few yards to play the shot. He later boasted that he dropped it two yards back on purpose to enable him to control the distance better. He was handed a two-shot penalty. Many experts said he should had been tossed out of the tournament.

Our verdict: Ignorant, but not guilty.

- During the Abu Dhabi Championship in January, Woods decided he was entitled to take a drop from a plugged lie on a desert course that is more bunker than grass in the Gulf region. He did so without consulting a referee and was later deemed to have called it wrong.

Our verdict: Ignorant: but not guilty.

- Only a few weeks after the Masters came golf's fifth Major in the form of the Players' Championship. He hooked a drive into some water before listening to his playing partner Casey Wittenberg's advice on where he should drop the ball. Not his greatest moment, but he looked away in anguish after the shot leaving Wittenberg as the only reliable source on where to drop.

Our verdict: A bit more suspicious, but again not guilty.

- Then came the BMW Championship in Chicago when he apparently protested his innocence by berating rules officials after being walloped with a two-shot penalty after the ball moved when he plucked a twig away from it. He was shown footage of the incident, but refused to accept the punishment with good grace.

Our verdict: Immature and unprofessional, but again not guilty.

Some will wonder if he is willing to cheat on his wife, would he be willing to cheat on his scorecard? Woods has been the victim of a set of circumstances beyond his control, but there are only too many ready to chastise Woods because they do not like his persona.

There is a more likely explanation, at least in part. He has more run-ins with rule officials simply because he plays more errant shots than he used to, and therefore ends up in places that aren't fit for golf balls. That is just a natural consequence of an elongated career.

The sad thing is that he would have increased his stature immeasurably had he had withdrawn from the Masters in April rather than play on when it was obvious the rules were being bent to keep him in. Walking away would have made him look like the bigger man, and probably rehabilitated his image almost completely in the eyes of all but a few die-hard haters.

Instead, he chose to ignore the glaringly obvious fact that any other player in the field would almost certainly have been disqualified in the same circumstances. If you are going to claim the reward of staying in the tournament when you probably should have headed home, you are going to risk the ire of commentators such as Chamblee calling you out on it.

But that doesn't make it cheating. In the final analysis, Woods seems to be single-minded, irritable, ill-tempered and unprofessional at times, but there are others playing golf who are as bad as Woods. Calling him a cheat is melodramatic. And wrong.

Bill M

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

The sad thing is that he would have increased his stature immeasurably had he had withdrawn from the Masters in April rather than play on when it was obvious the rules were being bent to keep him in. Walking away would have made him look like the bigger man, and probably rehabilitated his image almost completely in the eyes of all but a few die-hard haters.

Instead, he chose to ignore the glaringly obvious fact that any other player in the field would almost certainly have been disqualified in the same circumstances.

I completely agree with everything above that is not in bold and I said as much back then.  (I found it: http://thesandtrap.com/t/66225/the-2013-masters-tiger-drop-penalty-and-fallout/0_30#post_832838)

But he's wrong about it being "obvious" that the rules were being bent and that any other player would have been DQ'd.  Based on the information given to us and the timeline, you have to be making assumptions that they weren't totally truthful with us as to what transpired to say that anybody else would have been DQ'd.

Further, not only would any other player have probably not been DQ'd, but any other player probably would never have been penalized at all, because any other player isn't interviewed on TV after every round like Tiger is.  (There are a few ... Phil, Rory, and maybe a half dozen others, but most of them are not interviewed on live TV)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Yes to this. [quote name="Golfingdad" url="/t/70622/brandel-gives-tiger-an-f-tigers-agent-hints-at-legal-action-against-chamblee/54#post_910913"]Further, not only would any other player have probably not been DQ'd, but any other player probably would never have been penalized at all, because any other player isn't interviewed on TV after every round like Tiger is.  (There are a few ... Phil, Rory, and maybe a half dozen others, but most of them are not interviewed on live TV) [/quote]

"The expert golfer has maximum time to make minimal compensations. The poorer player has minimal time to make maximum compensations." - And no, I'm not Mac. Please do not PM me about it. I just think he is a crazy MFer and we could all use a little more crazy sometimes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Quote:

Originally Posted by phan52

The sad thing is that he would have increased his stature immeasurably had he had withdrawn from the Masters in April rather than play on when it was obvious the rules were being bent to keep him in. Walking away would have made him look like the bigger man, and probably rehabilitated his image almost completely in the eyes of all but a few die-hard haters.

Instead, he chose to ignore the glaringly obvious fact that any other player in the field would almost certainly have been disqualified in the same circumstances.

I completely agree with everything above that is not in bold and I said as much back then.  (I found it: http://thesandtrap.com/t/66225/the-2013-masters-tiger-drop-penalty-and-fallout/0_30#post_832838)

But he's wrong about it being "obvious" that the rules were being bent and that any other player would have been DQ'd.  Based on the information given to us and the timeline, you have to be making assumptions that they weren't totally truthful with us as to what transpired to say that anybody else would have been DQ'd.

Further, not only would any other player have probably not been DQ'd, but any other player probably would never have been penalized at all, because any other player isn't interviewed on TV after every round like Tiger is.  (There are a few ... Phil, Rory, and maybe a half dozen others, but most of them are not interviewed on live TV)

Yep.  Tiger was ultimately condemned by his own words.  95% of the field would have gone unpenalized in the same situation.

Rick

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

- Then came the BMW Championship in Chicago when he apparently protested his innocence by berating rules officials after being walloped with a two-shot penalty after the ball moved when he plucked a twig away from it. He was shown footage of the incident, but refused to accept the punishment with good grace.

Our verdict: Immature and unprofessional, but again not guilty.

Don't understand this verdict. If you think that Tiger, bent over his ball, couldn't see what the long lens camera showed everyone else - then you need to say so. "Bad attitude" doesn't quite cover it.

Or, are we supposed to cut Tiger some slack on the basis that most players in the field wouldn't have been filmed moving their ball in the woods?

Yep.  Tiger was ultimately condemned by his own words.  95% of the field would have gone unpenalized in the same situation.

That might be true. But if it is, it would only be logical to let that influence your opinion of the other 95% of the field - not your, or my, or Brandel's opinion of Tiger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Originally Posted by phan52

The sad thing is that he would have increased his stature immeasurably had he had withdrawn from the Masters in April rather than play on when it was obvious the rules were being bent to keep him in. Walking away would have made him look like the bigger man, and probably rehabilitated his image almost completely in the eyes of all but a few die-hard haters.

Instead, he chose to ignore the glaringly obvious fact that any other player in the field would almost certainly have been disqualified in the same circumstances.

Originally Posted by Golfingdad

I completely agree with everything above that is not in bold and I said as much back then.  (I found it: http://thesandtrap.com/t/66225/the-2013-masters-tiger-drop-penalty-and-fallout/0_30#post_832838)

But he's wrong about it being "obvious" that the rules were being bent and that any other player would have been DQ'd.  Based on the information given to us and the timeline, you have to be making assumptions that they weren't totally truthful with us as to what transpired to say that anybody else would have been DQ'd.

Further, not only would any other player have probably not been DQ'd, but any other player probably would never have been penalized at all, because any other player isn't interviewed on TV after every round like Tiger is.  (There are a few ... Phil, Rory, and maybe a half dozen others, but most of them are not interviewed on live TV)

The infraction was not just caught by what Tiger said in his presser. That is what forced them to act. They knew about the possible infraction beforehand ( http://www.golf.com/tour-and-news/tiger-woods-drop-masters-2013-inside-story ), but they were "cavalier" about it and chose not to even address it with Tiger before he finished his round.  That was why and how they came up with the convoluted (and correct) ruling to allow him to stay in the field.

Tiger's admission in the press conference might actually be what saved his butt because the officials realized they had screwed up. If it was another player and they had found out about the infraction after the fact and the other player had incorrectly signed his score card, he would have been gone. It turned out to be a very complex issue, and I think that Tiger could have made it all go away by just withdrawing. I am sure he was frustrated because I think it can be posited that, if his ball had not hit that pin, he probably would have birdied the hole and may very well have won the Masters. But in the end, the whole thing was precipitated by Tiger being careless and breaking the rules, and that is why I believe he would have been better off just going home.

Bill M

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator

The infraction was not just caught by what Tiger said in his presser. That is what forced them to act. They knew about the possible infraction beforehand ( http://www.golf.com/tour-and-news/tiger-woods-drop-masters-2013-inside-story ), but they were "cavalier" about it and chose not to even address it with Tiger before he finished his round.  That was why and how they came up with the convoluted (and correct) ruling to allow him to stay in the field.

Tiger's admission in the press conference might actually be what saved his butt because the officials realized they had screwed up. If it was another player and they had found out about the infraction after the fact and the other player had incorrectly signed his score card, he would have been gone. It turned out to be a very complex issue, and I think that Tiger could have made it all go away by just withdrawing. I am sure he was frustrated because I think it can be posited that, if his ball had not hit that pin, he probably would have birdied the hole and may very well have won the Masters. But in the end, the whole thing was precipitated by Tiger being careless and breaking the rules, and that is why I believe he would have been better off just going home.

You're either misremembering or stating your opinion as a fact yet again (that "any other player… would have been gone"). Tiger signed his scorecard. He wasn't given the penalty until the next morning (Saturday morning). Had the same thing happened to another player, the Rules would still be the same, and you have no basis for stating that "any other player would have been gone" except your opinion and distaste (despite declaring the opposite) for Tiger Woods.

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by phan52

The infraction was not just caught by what Tiger said in his presser. That is what forced them to act. They knew about the possible infraction beforehand ( http://www.golf.com/tour-and-news/tiger-woods-drop-masters-2013-inside-story ), but they were "cavalier" about it and chose not to even address it with Tiger before he finished his round. That was why and how they came up with the convoluted (and correct) ruling to allow him to stay in the field.

Tiger's admission in the press conference might actually be what saved his butt because the officials realized they had screwed up. If it was another player and they had found out about the infraction after the fact and the other player had incorrectly signed his score card, he would have been gone. It turned out to be a very complex issue, and I think that Tiger could have made it all go away by just withdrawing. I am sure he was frustrated because I think it can be posited that, if his ball had not hit that pin, he probably would have birdied the hole and may very well have won the Masters. But in the end, the whole thing was precipitated by Tiger being careless and breaking the rules, and that is why I believe he would have been better off just going home.

Originally Posted by iacas

You're either misremembering or stating your opinion as a fact yet again (that "any other player… would have been gone"). Tiger signed his scorecard. He wasn't given the penalty until the next morning (Saturday morning). Had the same thing happened to another player, the Rules would still be the same, and you have no basis for stating that "any other player would have been gone" except your opinion and distaste (despite declaring the opposite) for Tiger Woods.

Really, you have to stop. I do not have a "distaste" for Tiger Woods. I think he is the best thing to happen to professional golf since Arnold Palmer. And I didn't misremember anything. In fact, I posted a link to an article about what really happened, maybe you should read it.

Bill M

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator

I know "misremember" is technically a word.  But since Roger Clemens used it, it just doesn't sound right anymore.

Scott

Titleist, Edel, Scotty Cameron Putter, Snell - AimPoint - Evolvr - MirrorVision

My Swing Thread

boogielicious - Adjective describing the perfect surf wave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Note: This thread is 3787 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

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

    Coupon Codes (save 10-15%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope.
  • Popular Now

  • Posts

    • I agree with @klineka & @DaveP043 above.  When a new member first joins the club they cold be told that they are not eligible for tournaments until they have an established HCP.  As you said, it only takes a few rounds.  If they do not to post HCP that was their choice and choices have consequences.  If playing in the tournament is important to them then they should step up and establish an HCP.  Maybe they miss the 1st tournament, is that a real big deal?  And if it is a "Big Deal" to them then they had the opportunity to establish the HCP. As for not knowing how to report for HCP I assume your club has a pro and they should be able to assist in getting the scores reported and I suspect out of state courses may also have staff that can assist if asked.
    • Wordle 1,013 2/6 🟨⬜⬜🟨🟨 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 Thought I was gonna be a big shot today...  🙂    Nice Job!
    • Cool here's my tweak, "If a player’s ball lies in the general area and there is interference from exposed tree roots or exposed rocks that are in the fairway or 1 club length from the fairway the tree roots and exposed rocks are treated as ground under repair. The player may take free relief under Rule 16.1b.[But relief is not allowed if the tree roots only interfere with the player’s stance.]
    • I would never do the extended warranty on the $50 slow cooker.  I also routinely reject the extended service plans on those toys we buy for the grand-kids.  I do consider them on higher cost items and will be more likely to get one if the product has a lot of "Electronic Tech" that is often the problem longer-term.  I also consider my intended length of ownership & usage.  If my thought is it would get replaced in 2-3 years then why bother but if I hope to use it for 10 years then more likely to get the extension. I did buy out a lease about a year ago.  Just prior to the lease end date the tablet locked up and would not function.  I got it repaired under the initial warranty and would not have bought it out if they had not been able to fix it since IMO once electronic issues start in a car they can be hard to track down & fix.  They did fix it but when I bought out the lease I paid up for the extended warranty the would cover electronic failures because my intent is to keep that car for another 8-10 years and I just do not trust the electronics to last.  Last week the touch screen went black and was unresponsive.  It reset on the 2nd time I restarted the car but that is exactly how the last malfunction started.  I fully expect to have a claim on that on repair under the extended warranty.  I do not recall the exact cost to fix last time since I did not pay it but I think it was @ $700-$800 and I suspect that will be higher next time.
    • Have you looked at Model Local Rule F-9 Relief from Tree Roots in or Close to Fairway?  You could extend this to cover exposed rocks.  The rule is recommended to be used only for areas relatively near the fairway, a player who hits a shot 20 yards in the woods doesn't really deserve relief.   Players can always take Unplayable Ball relief, they're not required to play it from a rock or a root.  Of course, they hate to take the penalty stroke too.
×
×
  • 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...