-
Topics Being Discussed Right Now on The Sand Trap
-
Changing Your Swing Dramatically in Three Weeks - Dr. Luke Benoit Series (Golf IQ Podcast)
By iacas, in Swing Thoughts
- 3 replies
- 192 views
-
- 3 replies
- 121 views
-
- 5,391 replies
- 739,599 views
-
- 10,252 replies
- 756,608 views
-
"5 Minutes Daily" Practice Challenge 1 2 3 4 978
By iacas, in Instruction and Playing Tips
- 5 minutes daily
- dedication
- (and 6 more)
- 17,599 replies
- 1,665,712 views
-
Announcements
-
TST Partners
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). -
Popular Now
-
-
Posts
-
Me too - if you ignore your backswing and get yourself into a perfect position at impact (and obviously the dynamics are good too), then why would you want to change your backswing at all? Surely changing your backswing at that point is just going to mean you need to do something different to get to the impact point. That seems very strange to me. Also just to touch on the swing thought vs feel thing, I'll have a swing thought, which might be a sentence, but it's how I communicate to myself the feel that I'm trying to create. So something like "keep my left arm straight" might be what I say to myself in my internal monologue, but I'm saying it to generate the feeling of a straight left arm in my imagination so I can recreate that feel in reality. For a long time I was trying to tidy up my backswing (ha) and I had a tendency to sway off it with my hips. I needed more internal rotation in my right hip. So I'd set myself in that position, remember the feeling and try to recreate that in the backswing. After a while I didn't need to set it up because I knew the feeling and could just aim to do that in my backswing and I could recreate it. At that point I'd just say to myself "internal rotation of the right hip" and that was my swing thought, but I wasn't actively trying to internally rotate my right hip because of the words. I was creating the feeling that matched the memory of the feeling I had. Now I don't even need to think about it at all. It just happens. -
That'd be too high - the A, B, and C players are all better than the D player would be, but you're giving them the same weight. I'd be more inclined to let them hit a fourth shot, but not give any bump to the index: just do 0.25A + 0.2B + 0.15C. An A player getting to hit every third shot a second time is a big bonus. -
Personally I'd have them rotate the player who hits the fourth shot and have them hit four shots each time. Then handicap I'd make it 0.25 * A + 0.2 * B + 0.15 * C + 0.1 * (A + B + C)/3. If you don't want to have someone hit twice every shot, then rather than saying they can for one tee shot, I'd give the team of three one time per hole that they can have one of their players (at their choice) hit a second shot. If they use it on the tee, then they can't use it anymore. I'd think putting is where it could be most valuable since it has the starkest contrast between good outcome and bad outcome, but off the tee if you have nothing in play would obviously be where you'd want it. Do the handicap the same way - the difference then would be that they could always pick their best player to hit the extra shot, but they still get the extra handicap strokes for the worse players so it somewhat evens out. If you're set on only having them hit three shots at a time, then you'd need to figure out a way to handicap it fairly. I agree with Erik in his example that 8.5 doesn't feel like enough. Only one extra stroke for 50-60 extra shots on the round (I'm assuming there will be quite a few putts where the D player wouldn't be needed and they're not going to be shooting 15 under) seems like not a lot. My initial reaction was to say you'd want to double the allowances. If you lose the 5 handicap, then you'd get 0.5 x 10 + 0.4 x 15 + 0.3 x 20 = 17 shots. If you lose the 20 handicap then you'd get 11. 3.5 strokes for losing the 20 handicap seems like quite a lot to me, so maybe split the difference? Something like 0.5 x A + 0.35 x B + 0.2 x C could work. That would be 9 shots if you lose the 20 handicap and 14.25 if you lose the 5 handicap. If the handicaps are more even, let's say they're all 5 handicaps, 0.5 x A + 0.35 x B + 0.2 x C would be 5.25 shots, while the four 5 handicaps would get 3.5. 1.75 shots is probably not enough for losing the 4th go at every shot. If they're all scratch then both teams get 0. More I think about it, I think multipliers might not be the best option. Instead I'd say the four man team gets the 0.25 x A + 0.2 x B + 0.15 x C + 0.1 x D. Three man team gets 0.25 x A + 0.2 x B + 0.15 x C + 4. I think 4 scratch players would beat 3 scratch players at a scramble by somewhere in the 3-5 strokes range on average. The extra man is worth less the worse they get, but that's getting offset by the shots they would be giving the team, so if you lose a 20, you only get 2 extra strokes. Put another way, this is equivalent to assuming you have a fourth player who is never good enough to hit a ball in play, but has a 40 handicap in return. That seems reasonable to me.
-
.thumb.JPG.640dd6f31fe7f6aef91f879119bae1d9.JPG)
If it makes you feel any better, my drive was 336 yards according to shot scope… -
-
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now