Jump to content
Doug Sands

Sand Traps - That's Not Right!!

47 posts / 5439 viewsLast Reply

Recommended Posts

Want to hide this ad? Register for free today!

Welcome The Sand Trap.

Not sure I know what your point is…? If you're referring to the name of the site, it of course doesn't have to conform to the Rules of Golf, and honestly… if I had called the site "TheBunker.com" people might have thought it was about wars or something.

And…

Screen Shot 2018-10-05 at 10.57.36 PM.png

So, as you posted this in Rules of Golf, did I misunderstand something? Can you clarify what exactly it is you're trying to say?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

7 hours ago, iacas said:

Not sure what your point is

Mr. Sands seems to be trolling, ha ha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I've heard some bunkers referred to as "gravel pits" with good reason. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

11 minutes ago, Doug Sands said:

Just trying to enlighten your golfers 

We don't need enlightened.

Calling a bunker a "sand trap" is understood and accepted slang. The name of the site doesn't need to conform to the Rules of Golf.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Well we could go with upside down sand dunes I suppose. "Little Deserts" does have a good ring to it though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Why quibble?  Woods are not wooden.  There is no tee box.  Par and bogey have morphed.  I don't see a problem.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

4 hours ago, Doug Sands said:

In PGA school if you said "sand trap " they put a giant mouse trap in front of you until someone else said that term.  Now you know 

No, they don’t.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

1 hour ago, iacas said:

No, they don’t.

There is no Doug Sands listed in PGA members directory, maybe he was referring to the Potato Growers of America  school??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dennyjones said:

He has 3 posts and they are all related to debating the forum name.... there is plenty of great information on the forum. 

We all have our battles to wage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

20 hours ago, Doug Sands said:

Nowhere in the rules of golf does it say, "sand trap"

When you find it,  please let me know.  

They're called "bunkers." Go look. You won't find a bunker referred to as sand traps.

I'll call them whatever I want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I call them "flaws" in the course design that destroy my great round!

 

images.jpeg.d897539bcce2ba7591c6dab678afaaeb.jpeg

 

Edited by DrMJG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

7 hours ago, Sandy Divot said:

I'll call them whatever I want.

`When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less.'

`The question is,' said Alice, `whether you can make words mean so many different things.'

`The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, `which is to be master - - that's all.'

`When I make a word do a lot of work like that,' said Humpty Dumpty, `I always pay it extra.'

Edited by Rulesman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • 2018 TST Partners

    PING Golf
    FlightScope Mevo
    More to come…
  • Posts

    • Oy. I don't give a shit about two top ten finishes in a decade. Nor am I comparing Jack to Vijay Singh, a guy whose putting stroke has been AWOL since roughly 2011. He wasn't. That's easily refuted. As for straighter you're not comparing like to like - you don't know what the fairway widths were, how far the ball bounced, etc. But we do KNOW that Tiger was longer than Jack. Tiger at 43 with a fused back is longer than Jack was when Jack was 40, 41, 42, or 43. Tiger @ 43: 297.8 Jack @ 40: 269.0 Jack @ 41: 264.3 Jack @ 42: 264.6 Jack @ 43: 266.1 Tiger was almost 30 yards longer at 43 than Jack was at 40, 41, 42, or 43. Now, several posts in, you're changing that up to say that, given modern equipment or whatever, Jack would probably have been as long as Tiger. But that's not what you said. Uhhhhh… He didn't do that. Neither did I. No they aren't. Furthermore, if all Tiger had to do was hit the ball 266 yards, he could probably hit 80% of the fairways. Fairways that are likely narrower, etc. So you lost the distance one, and if you want to measure "accuracy" by "fairway hit percentage" I again will point out you're not comparing like to like. They aren't playing the same golf courses, the same fairways, or hitting it the same distances. Furthermore, and more importantly, I don't care about stats like this when determining who the GOAT is. If you do, that's cool, but what I care about is wins, dominance, scoring averages, that sort of thing. I don't care who had a better short game (Tiger by far), who was a better putter (tie?), who hit a better 7-iron (almost surely Tiger), or whatever. I care about Ws. So not only are you provably wrong on distance, possibly off-base on accuracy, but you're arguing about things that most people don't even care about. Nobody considers Calvin Peete in the GOAT discussion because of how accurate he was off the tee. Huh? No. 🤦‍♂️ Uhhh, according to Jack, it was 118 MPH. I call bullshit on that. Oy. I don't give a shit about two top ten finishes in a decade. Nor am I comparing Jack to Vijay Singh, a guy whose putting stroke has been AWOL since roughly 2011. He wasn't. That's easily refuted. As for straighter you're not comparing like to like - you don't know what the fairway widths were, how far the ball bounced, etc. But we do KNOW that Tiger was longer than Jack. Tiger at 43 with a fused back is longer than Jack was when Jack was 40, 41, 42, or 43. Tiger @ 43: 297.8 Jack @ 40: 269.0 Jack @ 41: 264.3 Jack @ 42: 264.6 Jack @ 43: 266.1 Tiger was almost 30 yards longer at 43 than Jack was at 40, 41, 42, or 43. Now, several posts in, you're changing that up to say that, given modern equipment or whatever, Jack would probably have been as long as Tiger. But that's not what you said. Uhhhhh… He didn't do that. Neither did I. No they aren't. Furthermore, if all Tiger had to do was hit the ball 266 yards, he could probably hit 80% of the fairways. Fairways that are likely narrower, etc. So you lost the distance one, and if you want to measure "accuracy" by "fairway hit percentage" I again will point out you're not comparing like to like. They aren't playing the same golf courses, the same fairways, or hitting it the same distances. Furthermore, and more importantly, I don't care about stats like this when determining who the GOAT is. If you do, that's cool, but what I care about is wins, dominance, scoring averages, that sort of thing. I don't care who had a better short game (Tiger by far), who was a better putter (tie?), who hit a better 7-iron (almost surely Tiger), or whatever. I care about Ws. So not only are you provably wrong on distance, possibly off-base on accuracy, but you're arguing about things that most people don't even care about. Nobody considers Calvin Peete in the GOAT discussion because of how accurate he was off the tee. Huh? No. 🤦‍♂️ Uhhh, according to Jack, it was 118 MPH. I call bullshit on that. Ha ha ha.
    • I’ve never been one to sit on my donkey for too long. The past four and half decades have pretty much been work for me , as so I know, for many others as well.  Developing my golf game will (not) dominate my new found free time. It will though give me a new avenue of pursuits that I hope will keep my mind expanding. Thanks for the input and reply. 
    • That sort of extrapolation is not possible.  You are talking that he would be hitting the golf ball further than the average long drive competitor. I am not buying it. He would be one of the longer hitters on tour. Jack is not the physical freak like Dustin Johnson. I would put him probably a top 10 in distance yearly if he was in his prime competing today.
    • Guess it must be really hard to justify / recoup the corporate investment necessary for this tour - seems like its a new name every 5 years or so. Only people who must love this are the logo companies!
    • The first time Jack had his clubhead speed measured, he was 58 years old and he was at 118 mph. From 1995-1998, aged 55-58, Jack made 11 cuts out of 14 majors, finished in the top 50 in seven of them, and finished 6th at the 1998 Masters. A 25 year-old Jack Nicklaus playing today with today's equipment would average 360+ in driving distance. And would be winning majors and be one of the best players in the game.
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Blog Entries

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. Dan42nepa
      Dan42nepa
      (63 years old)
    2. James Dalton
      James Dalton
      (78 years old)
    3. JMHARDING
      JMHARDING
      (29 years old)
    4. mwh1023
      mwh1023
      (52 years old)
    5. Skeesh
      Skeesh
      (47 years old)

×
×
  • 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...