Is Golf a Sport or a Game?

[Kapanda]

Originally Posted by Fourputt

Gotta go with Erik then.  You haven't been around golf long enough or at a high enough level to have an informed opinion.  Have a good day.

That's ridiculous.

Maybe we should go ask NAMbLA if paedophelia should be legal or not. Maybe we haven't fondled little boys enough to have an informed opinion.

[trackster]

While kapanda appears to be ruffling up a few peoples feathers, I'll chime in my 2 cents.  Golf is a sport, but it  by no means REQUIRES (key word) that much physical fitness.  One golfer that was leading the tournament at the AT&T; had a huge gut and they said he had the most birdies this year or something.  If you took a young kid.  Had him practice nothing but golf his teenage years even if he isn't athletic he has a pretty good chance of playing golf in college and possibly on the tour.  If you take the same kid, wind the clocks back and have him practice nothing but basketball, if he isn't athletic, he isn't going anywhere.  This is the great thing about golf, anyone can play it, and be good at it.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by Kapanda

the athletic ability required to play at the higher levels of the game, compared to the athletic ability required to play other sports, is comparatively minimal, which is why it shouldn't be considered a sport.

Says you. Funny, though, how most of the other "athletes" from the "obvious sports" all talk about how golf is also a sport.

You don't think it is. We get it. You don't need to make three posts in a row (use multiquote please) that keeps saying the same thing over and over again.

And your pedophile comparison was in poor taste.

[Kapanda]

Originally Posted by iacas

Says you. Funny, though, how most of the other "athletes" from the "obvious sports" all talk about how golf is also a sport.

You don't think it is. We get it. You don't need to make three posts in a row (use multiquote please) that keeps saying the same thing over and over again.

And your pedophile comparison was in poor taste.

You're right. I apologise.

[x129]

Lets make it real simple. Are baseball players athletes?  Pitching and hitting are pretty much identical to what a golfer needs? Neither one places any emphais on running fast or jumping. What about quarterbacks? If you define athleticism simply as jumping high and running fast, then no you don't need to be a good athlete to play golf. If you define it as the ability to generate power and have incredible precision (something that a lot of other sports don't require), then yeah golfers are athletes.

I think your idea that you just need to practice to be able to play DI (much less the tour) is a bit naive.  There are 1000s of kids that spend a lot of hours practicing who don't come close to either of them.  Anyone can be good at golf but DI isn't about being good. It is about being great. Now I am sure there is some low level program that your kid could play. There was also some 60 year old guy playing college basketball a couple years back...

Originally Posted by trackster

While kapanda appears to be ruffling up a few peoples feathers, I'll chime in my 2 cents.  Golf is a sport, but it  by no means REQUIRES (key word) that much physical fitness.  One golfer that was leading the tournament at the AT&T; had a huge gut and they said he had the most birdies this year or something.  If you took a young kid.  Had him practice nothing but golf his teenage years even if he isn't athletic he has a pretty good chance of playing golf in college and possibly on the tour.  If you take the same kid, wind the clocks back and have him practice nothing but basketball, if he isn't athletic, he isn't going anywhere.  This is the great thing about golf, anyone can play it, and be good at it.

[trackster]

Originally Posted by x129

Lets make it real simple. Are baseball players athletes?  Pitching and hitting are pretty much identical to what a golfer needs? Neither one places any emphais on running fast or jumping. What about quarterbacks? If you define athleticism simply as jumping high and running fast, then no you don't need to be a good athlete to play golf. If you define it as the ability to generate power and have incredible precision (something that a lot of other sports don't require), then yeah golfers are athletes.

I think your idea that you just need to practice to be able to play DI (much less the tour) is a bit naive.  There are 1000s of kids that spend a lot of hours practicing who don't come close to either of them.  Anyone can be good at golf but DI isn't about being good. It is about being great. Now I am sure there is some low level program that your kid could play. There was also some 60 year old guy playing college basketball a couple years back...

I will just say this and then probably chime out.  When I was in high school the best golfers in our high school were not on basketball teems or football teams, they were not "athletic" by conventional standards but they were good at golf.  You don't have to be an athlete to play good golf, but you do have to be a good athlete to play good basketball, football, hockey, etc.  I am not trying to rile anyone up over this, there are some golfers who are tremendous athletes and it shows on and off the course, how ever there are some golfers who are overweight and don't look like they could run at all who play really good golf.  While athletic ability isn't going to hurt you, it is not the main determining factor for playing great golf

[nosweat]

Greatest "mental Sport in history"  It is fun to watch big strong athletes "whiff" the little white ball!

[x129]

Were the best football or basketball players on the golf team? Not at my school.  Again you need to define what you mean by athlete. If your a fat slob but can hit a baseball 400 feet, your an athlete in my book. If your a fat slob that can through 98 mph and  hit a corner, your an athlete. If your a fat slob but can swing 115mph and hit a ball +-.5" your an athlete. If you a slow slug but you can through a football 60 yards into a 2 ft window, your an athlete in my book. You are free to say any of these people are not athletes.

Originally Posted by trackster

I will just say this and then probably chime out.  When I was in high school the best golfers in our high school were not on basketball teems or football teams, they were not "athletic" by conventional standards but they were good at golf.  You don't have to be an athlete to play good golf, but you do have to be a good athlete to play good basketball, football, hockey, etc.  I am not trying to rile anyone up over this, there are some golfers who are tremendous athletes and it shows on and off the course, how ever there are some golfers who are overweight and don't look like they could run at all who play really good golf.  While athletic ability isn't going to hurt you, it is not the main determining factor for playing great golf

[iacas]

Originally Posted by x129

Were the best football or basketball players on the golf team? Not at my school.  Again you need to define what you mean by athlete. If your a fat slob but can hit a baseball 400 feet, your an athlete in my book. If your a fat slob that can through 98 mph and  hit a corner, your an athlete. If your a fat slob but can swing 115mph and hit a ball +-.5" your an athlete. If you a slow slug but you can through a football 60 yards into a 2 ft window, your an athlete in my book. You are free to say any of these people are not athletes.

Right on.

The people saying golfers aren't athletes are looking at golfers and saying "because they play golf, they're not athletes." As in, they've already decided that golf isn't a sport, so even though some athletic people play golf, they've already written off the average PGA Tour pro as "non-athletic." It's a weird sort of circular logic, and the same as "baseball is clearly a sport, so everyone in the MLB is obviously an athlete, and since they're athletes, baseball is obviously a sport, and since it's a sport, everyone who plays it well is obviously an athlete, and since athletes play it, baseball is obviously a sport... (etc.)."

[trackster]

I am not sure if anyone is following The Dan Plan, but I think that the results of his experiment will tell a lot.  For those of you who don't know Dan had very limited exposure to the sport of golf, and really had no athletic background.  He decided to practice golf for 10,000 hours to see if he could make the PGA tour, from pretty much zero golf game to begin with.  He is at about 3000 hours right now and carries a handicap of around 6.  If he does succeed after the 10,000 hours, then I will say that my assumptions are right and that golf does not take that much athletic ability and anyone can do it with enough practice and play to an extremely high level.  If he doesn't succeed then I will have to swallow that I am in the wrong.   I don't care how much practice you put into playing football, if you don't have it, you are not going to become a professional.  Dan's results could prove this different for golf.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by trackster

I am not sure if anyone is following The Dan Plan, but I think that the results of his experiment will tell a lot.  For those of you who don't know Dan had very limited exposure to the sport of golf, and really had no athletic background.  He decided to practice golf for 10,000 hours to see if he could make the PGA tour, from pretty much zero golf game to begin with.  He is at about 3000 hours right now and carries a handicap of around 6.  If he does succeed after the 10,000 hours, then I will say that my assumptions are right and that golf does not take that much athletic ability and anyone can do it with enough practice and play to an extremely high level.  If he doesn't succeed then I will have to swallow that I am in the wrong.   I don't care how much practice you put into playing football, if you don't have it, you are not going to become a professional.  Dan's results could prove this different for golf.

So the results of a one-man experiment will completely determine how you feel about a topic? Don't you think that kind of shows how much weight we should give your current opinion?

I don't think Dan's results will "prove" anything.

And again, circular logic. You've already determined him to be "non-athletic."

[inthehole]

Its funny, I seem to pick endeavors that require extreme hand eye coordination (not sure why considering my lousey eye sight - maybe its my otherwise lack of physical conditioning that allows me to play athletic sports anymore) - competitive pistol shooting; 9 ball (pool); and golf.     It's interesting ... nobody refers to pool as the sport of pool, it's always the game of pool.     Shooting is a sport, because every type of competitive shooting, be it trap, high power rifle, sporting clays, NRA 2700 3 gun pistol matches - they're all referred to as "shooting sports".       Golf, IMHO is a sport - I can't empirically justify it as such, it just is based on the skill set it requires.     Of the three, pool requires the greatest hand eye coordination, purely based on the tiny margin for error - you can strike the object ball 1/64" off your point of intended impact & easily blow the shot if it's a high angle cut along a rail, etc.    Requires absolutely pheonominal eye sight as well to be played at a high level ... I'm thinking I need to start a movement to get pool recogized as a sport (nah)....

[iacas]

Originally Posted by inthehole

Its funny, I seem to pick endeavors that require extreme hand eye coordination (not sure why considering my lousey eye sight - maybe its my otherwise lack of physical conditioning that allows me to play athletic sports anymore) - competitive pistol shooting; 9 ball (pool); and golf.     It's interesting ... nobody refers to pool as the sport of pool, it's always the game of pool.     Shooting is a sport, because every type of competitive shooting, be it trap, high power rifle, sporting clays, NRA 2700 3 gun pistol matches - they're all referred to as "shooting sports".       Golf, IMHO is a sport - I can't empirically justify it as such, it just is based on the skill set it requires.     Of the three, pool requires the greatest hand eye coordination, purely based on the tiny margin for error - you can strike the object ball 1/64" off your point of intended impact & easily blow the shot if it's a high angle cut along a rail, etc.    Requires absolutely pheonominal eye sight as well to be played at a high level ... I'm thinking I need to start a movement to get pool recogized as a sport (nah)....

Not to be whatever, but I play pool too and think golf is the more difficult sport. The ball's simply not going that far and even the tightest pockets are almost two balls wide. Even if you limit golf to just putting, the best in the world make a 20-footer how often, versus the best in the world making an "average difficulty" shot in pool how often? The pool stroke itself is shorter and thus easier to strike accurately. A lot of emphasis is placed on simply lining up properly, which is fairly non-athletic IMO.

I've never completed a run of nine straight balls (I've done six) or anything, so it could very well be a case of me not having a clue what pool is like at the top levels, but I used to watch a fair amount of it when I was in a bit of a billiards phase, and took a three-day class, and attended a few pro events, etc. So while I'm not speaking from a point of SUPER experience, I'm not speaking from a point of none, either.

[trackster]

Originally Posted by iacas

So the results of a one-man experiment will completely determine how you feel about a topic? Don't you think that kind of shows how much weight we should give your current opinion?

I don't think Dan's results will "prove" anything.

And again, circular logic. You've already determined him to be "non-athletic."

Watch his videos, he will tell you of his background.  He is a self quoted non athlete, with almost no golf experience.

[iacas]

Watch his videos, he will tell you of his background.  He is a self quoted non athlete, with almost no golf experience.

That still misses the point. For starters, he'd have to conduct a similar experiment with every sport out there. If they were all "disproved" then there you go. At the end of the day, it's an experiment with one person, and you're apparently willing to base your entire opinion on its results. Besides, the smart money is already on "he will not become a Tour Pro." Heck, some aren't even sure he'll become a scratch golfer, and that's MILES away from being a tour pro.

[Fourputt]

Originally Posted by iacas

That still misses the point. For starters, he'd have to conduct a similar experiment with every sport out there. If they were all "disproved" then there you go. At the end of the day, it's an experiment with one person, and you're apparently willing to base your entire opinion on its results.

Besides, the smart money is already on "he will not become a Tour Pro." Heck, some aren't even sure he'll become a scratch golfer, and that's MILES away from being a tour pro.

He's 3000 hours in and he has only accomplished the easy part.  Heck, I was once down to a 9 handicap and I haven't practiced 3000 hours my entire life.  He needs to get the 6 handicap to a +6, then maybe he has a chance to squeeze into the Tour.  However, that requires a level of perfection exponentially higher than where he is at currently.

[trackster]

Originally Posted by iacas

That still misses the point. For starters, he'd have to conduct a similar experiment with every sport out there. If they were all "disproved" then there you go. At the end of the day, it's an experiment with one person, and you're apparently willing to base your entire opinion on its results.

Besides, the smart money is already on "he will not become a Tour Pro." Heck, some aren't even sure he'll become a scratch golfer, and that's MILES away from being a tour pro.

Not really,  I play football in college and I can tell you that I do not have the physical ability to play in the nfl.  I have team mates that have put in thousands of hours and do not have the physical ability to play in the nfl.  No matter what they do, it just isn't going to happen.  I am sure that you could say the same thing about golf, however Dan's results will be a good bench mark to provide evidence for or against golf.

I hope he proves you wrong and makes it to the tour.

Originally Posted by Fourputt

He's 3000 hours in and he has only accomplished the easy part.  Heck, I was once down to a 9 handicap and I haven't practiced 3000 hours my entire life.  He needs to get the 6 handicap to a +6, then maybe he has a chance to squeeze into the Tour.  However, that requires a level of perfection exponentially higher than where he is at currently.

What does that even matter.  Your handicap was 3 worse than his at one blue moon?  Considering he started with limited golf experience, in his mid 30's, I think being a 6 right now is pretty good.  What did you expect him to be after 3000 hours, a +2?

[Dave2512]

Anybody that's put 3000 hours into something has taken it beyond a game. Didn't he quit his job to pursue this? Whether Dan realizes it or not he is demonstrating the same commitment by training that much that any athlete does that wants to succeed. Honestly when I read the magazine feature about him I was surprised that after all that time he was only at the level he was at. I know lots of people that don't put in that much time and are better at golf than he is. His self deprecation isn't surprising, he's not good enough to be anything but.