Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 04/26/2019 in all areas

  1. Played today and shot 88, counting all my strokes.! After approximately 1 year of practice and playing after a 10 year layoffs, i'm finally starting to see progress. The key was simply keeping the ball in play, avoiding double bogeys, trying to make smooth wings and not trying to kill the ball. Only made 1 double after a ball OB, Now need to work more on my short game. if i hd been able to get the ball up and down, and putted better, could have shot 84-85,. but that;'s golf. I've never played a round where i didn't leave at least a couple of strokes on the course.
  2. People do not choose how susceptible they are to addictive substances. There have been many, many cases where a person completely naive to opioids was placed on them for knee surgery, for example. The prescriber negligently wrote directions as ‘take 2 tabs every 8 hrs.’ So they do exactly that. Next thing you know they’re addicted to the medication without even realizing it. And this is especially difficulty to deal with if the person is genetically prone to opioid dependence. Some people can drink alcohol everyday and stop at one drink. Then go weeks without having any. Some people have a couple of drinks and it triggers an insatiable response to continue. Additive substances don’t effect everybody the same. Period. It’s similar to muscular build/fitness gurus. I’m not minimizing their efforts but some people can do much less training and see substantially better results all based on their DNA, not their incredible workouts alone. Same with your smoking. It’s awesome you quit but you may have a much less ‘inherent addiction’ to nicotine than another person. Sometimes it takes a lot of self reflection to admit one has an addiction. They want to ‘beat it’ or often try to deny it. They will tell themselves they will only have two beers then stop. Or just a glass of wine with dinner ....4 hours later they’re smashed after having one after the other. The acceptance that one has an issue is a responsibility that one needs to take/accept. But you must understand the medical side of this and show compassion for them. It’s not easy to accept you have such an issue especially with a substance (alcohol) you see so many people enjoy with no issues at all. Chris has taken this step.
  3. If they're not Miuras forged from the heart of a supernova and cooled with the tears of virgin dragons, they ain't for me
  4. Got nothing to do with that, man. Political correctness, that is. I'm big on personal responsibility, too. But this ain't that. This is a medical condition, and by taking a leave of absence and focusing on getting healthy from his disorders, I could argue that he is taking responsibility.
  5. You clearly don't know what you're talking about here. Contrary to what you might think, attorneys are bound by the ABA standards of professional conduct. Lawyers cannot lie in any court document or proceeding as that is grounds for disciplinary action, sanctions, and even disbarment under Rule 11 and other applicable rules. Lawyers have a duty to accurately portray what the law is in a particular jurisdiction. However, lawyers are also bound to zealously advocate for their clients. Lawyers can come up with creative arguments and argue "loopholes" as some may call them, to win for their clients (and of course themselves). That's part of the adversarial system. It pits opposing lawyers against each other to win for their clients and tries to ensure each side has adequate representation. Nonetheless, no matter how a lawyer may try to "spin" the facts or argue a "loophole," the law is the law. Comments like yours and from others are based mostly upon anecdotal stories and feelings they have and are not based upon any actual knowledge or experience in the legal field. Even those people who have some experience as a client, still don't know the ins and outs of the legal system. I'm not saying it's not flawed and doesn't need some changes, but it's pretty good by and large. We're getting way off topic, but to me, the constant battle in the legal system boils down to: rules v. standards. Rules are objective and we know what the law is. There will be some loopholes if the facts of a case don't fall specifically within the bounds of a given rule, but at least you know the law. Example: speed limit is 55 mph. That's a rule. If you go even one mile over the limit, under a "rules" system, you should get the maximum penalty each every time regardless of excuse or whatever. Standards try to incorporate "real life" and the subjective "let's look at the equities of the case" vibe. Example: speed limit is 55 mph, but the cop lets people go so long as they don't go over his rule of thumb of, I dunno, 65 mph. This allows for a lot of leeway and people can also argue discrimination and yadda yadda. So see, it goes back and forth on whether we want rules or standards, and it gets further complicated because state laws are not uniform across the land as states can make their own state laws. Bringing this back to Tiger's case, I don't know FL tort law, but the general rule is employers are vicariously liable for the conduct of their employees while they are within the scope of their employment. This rule doesn't generally include "coming and going" to work, but there are exceptions to this rule. @iacas Generally, moral obligations aside, you don't have a duty to act unless you have a legal obligation to do so. States have their own laws on this and can vary greatly. Some states impose no duty on bystanders to intervene, while on the other extreme some not only impose a duty but failure to do so may result in a fine or worse. It depends on the facts and the jurisdiction.
  6. Good grief, why? I’ve played for almost 50 years and never had anyone complain about that. I played today directly behind 3 4-somes of super seniors at the club. These guys haven’t moved quickly to do anything since the Nixon administration, and while we waited on every single shot, we still played in 3:20. Slowish by our admittedly fast standards, but if 12 guys, all over 70, none of whom were likely to have broken 90, can get around in that kind of time, there’s absolutely no reason anyone else can’t!
  7. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcoholism Just sayin'.
  8. He holds course records at courses he's never played..... Sharks have a week named for him...
  9. A wife and 3 children. Nothing has done more harm to my game than them. That being said I wouldn't trade them for the world.
  10. If you follow the swing thread you know I'm always working on getting less shallow/more steep on the downswing but only made minimal gains mechanically. To see if I can really change it I've been wanting to experiment with a couple things and got to run it by my buddy Mario a few weeks ago. Cool thing is he agreed and funny thing is it was what he wanted to try with me as well. Here is the change to the pattern, also ties into the hand ascending and steeper hand path pieces. Obviously these components are specific to me, Mario laughs that I'm the only player he gives these feels to and would prefer it if I didn't share because he thinks it'll hurt his business 😛 A piece that was left out that we are also working on is trying to do more "work at the hip" on the backswing, more internal rotation at the hip joint. Tendency is to rotate the right femur more external, pelvis turns a little flat and then the leg kicks internal hard and fast, causing me to tip back and flip. If I can get more internal work going, I'll be able to move the pelvis down and away from the leg in transition (internal to less internal). Doing that by setting up with the right knee more bowed out (was getting it kicked in, not on purpose) and feeling like the left knee "holds" until my right hand passes my right thigh. Here I am focusing on that along with some downswing rehearsals. Club head "tumbling" out on the downswing, not way under at 5.5-7. Mechanically I think this is the best my putting has ever looked and it's been pretty good on the course the past several months. Mostly working on setup stuff. Shoulders level, arms external feeling, lats packed, right hand controlling the stroke, underhand release feeling of the putter.
  11. You forgot about the grips made from the finest unicorn leather.
  12. The 5 wood is easier to hit than the driver. The difference is the lack of distance. Until you get lessons, this is a bandaid fix. I recommend you get lessons sooner than later and work with an instructor to fix your driver issues. Your improvement ceiling will be limited until you do. Not to say you can't play w/o the driver but to get to the next level, you are going to need it.
  13. Get the book the lowest score wins. It's much cheaper, based on quite a bit of data, and has helped me immensely.
  14. Guys I played many events against Jack.-He was better than me. But hell at this point Sean O'Hair is 10x the golfer I ever was. Jack had much weaker competition in his day - ME! Me and a bunch of club pros.
  15. Congratulations, and welcome to TST! Please feel free to contribute whenever and wherever you see something interesting. I'd be interested to find out what made this round different and better than your normal round. I know that most of my "good" rounds come when I consistently strike the ball well. That keeps me in play, minimizes penalties, and gets me close to the green in regulation almost every time. Occasionally my short game and putting will produce a good score when my ballstriking is sub-standard, but that's pretty rare. My BEST scores come when my ballstriking, chipping, and putting is all really good. So for you, I'd suggest the same approach. Improve your ballstriking, your full swing shots. Tee shots in play (and longer is better as long as its in play), second shots on or near the green, its hard to make a bad score on a hole when you do those two things well. Second, short game shots should ALWAYS end up on the green, two-chips are bad. Last, putting, make your share of 5 and 6 footers, and minimize 3-putts when you're further away. Last, you can learn a whole lot by reading Lowest Score Wins. Lowest Score Wins - Shoot Lower Scores on the Golf Course NOW Shoot lower scores on the golf course… NOW! This isn't swing instruction, but more about all kinds of decisions. Evaluating your game and deciding what to practice, and deciding which shot to try on the course, along with lots more.
  16. WARNING - FamousDavis Is An Extremely Difficult Poster Which We Recommend Only For Highly Patient Posters. (Just having a little fun with you Davis)
  17. Bethpage Black begins with B and ends with K. It was fairly obvious in retrospect.
  18. I sad it before, probably 230 pages back, but I don't understand why it matters enough to anyone to get to more than 350 pages of debate. I loved watching Jack when he was playing. He was my golf hero, through the 70's and well into the 80's. Then a few years later came Tiger, and while I never saw him as a heroic inspiration (I was older by then and knew my own game better), I loved watching him play and rooting for him.... still do. They have both provided hours and hours of entertainment for all of us who love this sport, and both are/were head and shoulders above their competition. Both have made shots that you saw it live and still couldn't believe what you just witnessed. Tiger probably has more of those highlight reel moments than Jack, but then Tiger got far more TV air time than Jack did. For most of Jack's career They would only televise the back 9 on Saturday and Sunday, with no TV at all from the first 2 rounds. Tiger's record has pretty much eclipsed Jack's now, and he still has time to stretch his lead a bit more as long as he stays healthy. For me, that doesn't diminish what Jack did during his career, it only emphasizes just how good Tiger was in his prime. No matter who was actually the better player, I only see the fact that both players accomplished what they did as being a good thing for we the viewers, and for the game of golf.
  19. Not gonna see this on tv or streaming.
  20. I can't speak for the others, but the ability to tag shots as "punch shot, flighted shot, half shot, full shot" on Game Golf is on my wish list.
  21. No, you’re advocating that business owners and bar managers should be absolved of all responsibility for their own actions and policies. Unlike you, I think everyone should be responsible for their own actions, instead of just selecting the person MOST responsible and assigning them 100% liability.
  22. Another example of how far we’ve come from accepting responsibility for our own actions. It’s always someone else's fault... Hey asshole. You weren’t over-served. You over-consumed!
  23. Welcome to TST! I would suggest you get a good idea at where your true weaknesses are in your game. You might find that practicing from 100yds in is a quick way to save strokes but in the long run you’d come out better to work on your tee shots and approaches. Unless you have glaring weaknesses in your short game it’s the long game where most strokes are lost so improving that really improves your scoring in the long haul. Cheers!
  24. So, because it rains every freaking day around here. I’ve been spending a fair amount of time on the range. (Yes, they have some covered bays) Anyway, I get to know the “range rats” pretty well. One guy is all smiles last night with his brand new irons and driver. He has a set of Wilson D300 irons; they are brand new. He lets me hit them. They are almost boring. Every shot I hit high and dead straight. “How much did these set you back?” I ask. He says he got them when they went on sale at Rock Bottom Golf for $250.00. “Pretty cool.” I say. “Check out my new driver.” He suggests. He has a Taylormade RBZ Black, also brand new. Turns out he got that for under $150 at Dick’s sporting goods annual golf sale. So this guy got a brand new set of irons, and a brand new driver all for under $400. I have to say I was impressed. What’s my point? You may ask. Okay, I have 2 points. 1 – You can fill your bag with quality, brand new stuff if you are patient and shop around. 2 – Why on Earth aren’t more people using the Wilson D300 irons? Hold on, hold on, before all of you low handicappers jump down my back about shaping shots around trees and flighting shots high and low etc…. I’m not talking about you. I’m talking about the high handicappers who just want to hit high straight iron shots. From my (albeit brief test) of the D300’s they could not be easier to hit high and straight. For the price these seem like a no brainer. Even if you weren’t getting them on sales at Rock Bottom, they are still really inexpensive and if you wait for the sales at Rock Bottom, well… Now I know that you should get your irons and your driver fit for you, but I’ve read that 80% of more golfers don’t do that. Anyhow, point of my post is there are great deals to be had. My other point is if you are a high handicapper looking for a set or irons that won’t break your bank give the Wilson D300’s a look.
  25. Buddy you’re barking up the wrong tree. I’m a pretty conservative person and much in line with “take responsibility for your own actions” as it gets. You’re off base here and don’t know what you’re talking about. Yes, it is a decision people make. I agree. But people get addicted and it becomes a medical issue. Just like smoking or diabetes that isn’t inherited and kinds of other things- they’re behavior based but are medical issues. If you can’t see that then you need to learn a little bit more about healthcare and biology.
  26. 4 points
    Hello again, I haven't written one of these blogs in a long while. I haven't really been on the site for a long while. I had been practicing and posting every day for 405 days, That streak came to an end on May 10, 2018, when I went into the hospital. The last 11 months I have been going through things outside of golf, that are more important for my growth as a human being. Golf is my getaway, my therapy, my distraction, and my hobby. I love the game, it sometimes doesn't love me back when I'm playing it. Whether I'm hitting a 9-iron at the second that checks up too soon or I lip out that 4-footer on 18 for a 71, Golf is hard (R). I've decided that I really don't care that it's hard, I've decided that I just want to go out and relax and have fun playing the game. In the city championship last Labor Day weekend, I made the flight finals for the first time. I've played in that tournament every year since 2010, I lost 7 & 5 (ironically I played the same guy in the finals this year as I did in my first ever match), 2011 4 & 3, 2012 I was really sick Sunday and had to W/D, 2013, I lost 1 up, 2014 I lost 2 & 1 2015 I finally won a match 3 & 2 (It helped that I was out-driving my opponent by 70 yards), then lost 7 and 5, 2016 I lost 1 up, 2017 I made the semis and lost 3 and 2, Last year I hilariously won the 12th hole of my first match with a triple-bogey 8, to go 1 up in the match. Whilst laughing about it on the way to the 13th. I proceeded to play the next three holes, par, par, birdie to win 4 & 3. In the semifinals, I was 1 down after 6, (I started terribly was something like 4 over through 6 medal), I chipped in for birdie at 7, made par at 8, made birdie at 9 after hitting a terrible drive (I knocked the third shot to 4 feet), made bogey at 10, nearly made 1 at 11 (ended up making 3 I missed a 5 footer that was already conceded), and birdied 12. I went from 1 down, to 5 up in 6 holes, I put the match away with a par on 13 and won 6 & 5. (yes I won 10 with a bogey, my opponent had trouble with the right side trees, the only reason I made 6 was I took 3 to get down from 5 feet off the front of the green) I played the last 7 holes in 2-under and didn't even know I was playing that well until someone told me after my match ended. I was playing well but got tanked in the final 7 & 6. I did not play badly. I won just 2 holes, the 2nd and the 11th, however, that being said, I was losing holes to pars and birdies, I made only one double-bogey and that was on the 7th which is a par-3 (It was a good 5 too, I pushed a 7-iron into Fall Creek which is Oscar Bravo, and made 3 with the second ball, nearly holing a 15-footer to halve the hole. I think he shot 1 or 2 over, I shot 8 or 9 over and we halved #9 with birdies, which was a funny exchange, because he chipped in from just short of the green and I holed about a 30-footer on top of him. It was very different finishing second in my flight instead of last or T-3 twice. Going into the tournament, I decided that I was going to go out and just have fun, and whatever happened so be it. Over the winter I didn't do much practicing, as a matter of fact, very little. If you've seen my signature, I have different clubs in play right now but still have my Exotics bag. Actually might actually switch to Maltby from GolfWorks for the time being. I don't necessarily need the best and greatest new clubs. Becky and I separated for 5 months between October and March and we have since reconciled. Without getting to personal, one of our goals we came up with, was to try to do a hobby together. She tried golf a couple times with me, (she actually witnessed me birdie both par-fives on the front which I seldom do), but we decided we were going to either bowl or try disc golf. Come to find out disc golf is very inexpensive to get started in. I'm still trying to figure out the rules, but I'll get it. It's fun, it takes less time than real golf and is just as tricky. I was talking to one of our regulars at the golf course about it just yesterday, we're making predictions on which one I break par in first, disc golf or traditional golf. I've played 9 holes twice this year so far. The first time out I really didn't putt so I couldn't count it, but I estimate, I shot probably 39 or 40 on the front (or white tees, Newman is 9 holes with 2 sets of tees). Yesterday I shot 38, with one of the scratch players playing skins and they we're surprised. I didn't make any birdies but my par with a half-whack on 18 was good enough for $15, and my scratch partner and I cleaned up in the side match too. for my two bogeys, I lipped out on 11 after a decent bunker shot, and I was short sided and laid-up my chip to 15 feet on 14, and singed the edge, the rest we're all pars. I covered his double on 10 and his bogey on 18 (he birdied 12, 14, and 17 to shoot 36) so we were 3-under as a best ball team. I'm playing well, I have a very simple pre-shot routine with one swing-thought, right foot, left foot. My balance is a lot better, I actually finally figured out where the "balls of the feet" are. The step-through is now gone, my balance is back, and hopefully with any luck at all, I might get down into the 4.x by the end of the season, it'll be difficult, but I think with my new approach I can do it. I'll give you guys an update this time in May on how my game is doing to see if I've improved. For those of you who are wondering, Alina shot 49 for 9 holes last week (She's 5 1/2). She went with me and I really didn't play, She did. Mike told me. "Be careful, out there" She striped he drive from the actual ladies tee on #1 over the bunker, (She carries it about 125 yards now, and she is deadly with her hybrid (She has one of those now as she outgrew her other set). I played a little (I only brought a few clubs to pitch, chip and putt with so I had my 9-iron, wedges and putter with me. She actually beat me on #7, She made par and I made bogey and I didn't let her win the hole I legitimately did make bogey. When she parred 7, I knew she had a shot to break 50. This group of ladies was behind Alina and I, and they usually would be a little snotty about a twosome in front playing slow (we weren't Alina plays nine in 1:45). Saw Alina, par the 7th. To par she was +10 through 7. (She made 9 on #1) She piped a drive and hit 2 hybrids on the green at #8 and almost made par, tapped in for bogey, She hit a perfect drive on 9 and I let Alina make this decision herself, she grabbed her driver for her second shot (She got it just short of 250 out, off a 140 yard bullet), I think she thought she needed birdie to break 50, but she only needed a 7 (I don't tell Alina her cumulative scores, I tell her at the end) She topped one down there about 50 yards just short of 200, she then hits hybrid, hybrid on the front of the green (pin was all the way back) And three-putted for double... But that was all she needed for her first sub-50 9-holes. One of the ladies behind us, came up and asked me what she'd shot, I said "49 and she started with a 9." Alina plays the par-3s well at Newman from the ladies tees mainly because, well, it's just a driver for her. I talked to a local pro recently about maybe getting her a fuller set, and he advised against it for now, as her game develops and when she gets older then we can revisit that then. Not bad for a kid that plays 3 or 4 9-hole rounds a year at this point. But asks me to go hit golf balls all the time. She stripes it and I mean stripes it.
  27. These threads pop up a couple times a year. It's better, in the long run, to learn how to hit a driver: A driver goes further than a 3 wood, so you're costing yourself distance and thus strokes. Driver is the most forgiving club in your bag. Driver has the biggest face of any club. 3 woods are the least forgiving club in your bag (unless you have a 2 iron I guess). Personally, getting my driver under control was the biggest factor in improving my scores. I was the guy that only hit 3 wood for a long time. I quickly dropped strokes when I started to be more consistent with my driver. All of this is in the long run. If you can't hit driver without slicing it off the planet, then, yes, use your 3 wood off the tee. On that day. But you're not going to play your best golf if you don't learn how to hit a driver.
  28. If you have a bunch of holes that you can not reach in regulation I would suggest move up to the next tee box. About ten years ago I was playing on a course that I could not reach four par fours with my best two shots. I also had trouble reaching two of the par 5's with my third shot unless I hit a mid iron or hybrid. I finally swallowed my pride and move up to the senior tees. A difference of 400 total yards. 6100 vs 6500 yards. What a difference this made. I was enjoying playing again instead of struggling to make par on the six holes I could not reach in regulation. Later I joined two other guys my age and they were struggling at the 6500 yard tees. After a couple rounds with them I got them to move up with me and they thanked me when they finally moved up. Golf should be fun not work. Most of us play for enjoyment as we get enough frustration at work so lets play at a distance we can have a good chance to succeed and not get upset.
  29. I often accuse Jack's advocates of having hazy, rosy memories of him dominating every year, holding off a charging Arnie, Trevino, Miller, and Watson down the stretch every time he won, but it seems the same thing is happening with Tiger. Tiger was by far the most dominant player in the history of golf, but he didn't dominate every week, or even every year. At his best, Tiger did miss fairways, did miss greens, did chunk it, did miss crucial putts, and did lose most of the events he entered (except for the greatest two-year stretch of golf ever seen, from the 1999 Byron Nelson to the 2001 Memorial, when Tiger won an incredible 29 times out of 55 events, including 20 of 41 official PGA events, 5 majors, 3 WGCs, 3 Memorials, 2 Bay Hills, a Players, and a TC. A first ballot Hall of Fame career in two years!). He had several seasons where he was far from dominant --- 1998, 2004, 2010-12, 2014-18. And even during good years, he sometimes didn't win all the awards, mostly because (like Jack) he played less often than his competition, so a beast like Vijay could steal money titles by playing almost twice as many events. Tiger even gave a Vardon Trophy away in 2006 after winning six events in a row, when all he had to do was shoot below 80 for a few more rounds, but he thought he'd rather go spear fishing, so he didn't get his 60 rounds in. In other words, Tiger left a lot on the table. If Phil is #3 on the all-time list, he must have won a lot of the awards that Tiger didn't, right? Let's take a look. Phil turned pro just before the 1992 US Open, 1401 weeks ago, almost 27 years ago. Having won a PGA event the previous year as an amateur (and fair play to him, that was something that Tiger and Jack never did), he was exempt from the get-go. Tiger was number one in the world rankings for 683 weeks. That leaves 718 weeks Phil could have been #1 in the world. 17 other golfers did it, including journeymen like Westwood and Donald. Phil never did. Tiger was Player of the Year 11 times. That leaves 16 years Phil could have won it (and actually 32 chances to win it, since there are two different POYs, determined by entirely different methods). 14 other golfers did it, including Tom Lehman, who won only five PGA events in his career. Phil never did. Tiger was the leading money winner 10 times. That leaves 17 years Phil could have done it. 12 other golfers did it, including Vijay 3 times during Tiger's prime. Phil never did. Tiger won the Vardon Trophy nine times. That leaves 18 times Phil could have won it. 14 other golfers did it, including Matt Kuchar in a year when he won a single event, and forever endeared himself to me when he dropped a Jeepers-bomb after hitting a drive OB. Phil never did. The lesser-known Byron Nelson Award is the PGA Tour's version of the Vardon, and requires only 50 rounds. Tiger also won that nine times, and 13 other golfers won it the other 18 years, including Steve Stricker, who by all accounts is a super nice guy, but who is probably being mentioned in a GOAT-related thread for the first time in his life. Phil never did. Tiger had the most wins in a season 12 times. That leaves 15 times Phil could have done it. And hey, he actually did it one year, namely 1996, getting the last of his four wins the week before Tiger turned pro. Finally, Tiger has won 2 of the 12 available FedEx Cups, leaving 10 times Phil could have won it. 10 different golfers have won the other 10, including Bill Haas and Billy Horschel, who join Stricker in seeing their names in a GOAT thread for the first time. Phil never did it. So even if we concede that Tiger is inhuman, and absolutely unbeatable, and that nobody could possibly have challenged him for any of the awards he won that demonstrate sustained excellence over a season, he somehow left 110 awards available for others to win (assuming I counted right, and including both versions of the POTY) during Phil's winning career. Phil won only one of those 110, even during Tiger's slumps and injured periods when dozens of golfers, including some that most golf fans wouldn't recognize off the course, were winning them. And he never made it to World #1 during Tiger's slumps, even though 17 of his contemporaries did. Vijay, seven years older than Phil, and joining the tour a year after Phil, had 3 money titles, a wins title (won 9 times in 2004, more than anyone ever except for Nelson, Snead, Hogan, and Tiger), a Vardon, a Nelson, a POTY, a FedEx Cup, and was #1 in the world for 32 weeks. All after Tiger turned pro, and all before Tiger hit the hydrant. Nor did Tiger take very many wins away from Phil -- Phil finished second (including ties) to Tiger in just 4 PGA events, including one major (the US Open at Bethpage). Phil didn't suffer nearly as much as Chris DiMarco, who finished solo second to Tiger in two majors and a WGC, or Ernie Els, who finished second to Tiger in five PGA events and two Euro events, including two majors in a row (to be fair, he lost those two majors by a total of 23 shots, so he probably didn't have high hopes of winning those weeks). We should be consistent. If dominance is the main criterion for GOAT, then the third GOAT should be the third most dominant. To me, Phil is the epitome of a golfer who was very good for a long time, but never dominant. Almost 20 years ago, when I was debating Tiger vs Jack on the old r.s.g. usenet board, I would sometimes invoke the hypothetical career of a fictional golfer who averaged a win or two a year for 30 years, maybe with an occasional major, compiling big career numbers but never the best golfer of the year, and use that unlikely scenario to prove that longevity was not greatness. Phil is now that guy. Don't get me wrong, I love watching Phil play, and I think he's a great guy for the way he treats the fans and his fellow players (like the time he rescued Mahan during a post-Ryder Cup press conference, when Mahan started crying. That was pure class.) But as fellow Phil fans can sadly attest, even after he pulls off an incredible shot, you're sort of waiting to see how he'll blow it. It's a pleasant surprise when he actually wins. That is the opposite of dominance. Unless you played before there were world rankings or the awards listed above, I don't think you're even sniffing dominance until you can say you've been #1 in the world, and have won at least four of the sustained excellence awards -- most wins, money title, scoring title, POTY, FedEx Cup. There are three players under 30 --- Thomas, Spieth, and McIlroy --- who have already done that. Spieth and Thomas are only 25 years old, born a year after Phil joined the tour, and they've already been more dominant than Phil ever was. Phil turned 25 over a year before Tiger joined the tour, and had over four years to duplicate the feats of Spieth and Thomas against fields almost completely lacking in star power. But Norman was far more dominant during that time than Phil, so how can you rank Phil ahead of Norman? IMO, when you are talking GOAT you have to go through all the golfers who dominated for at least a couple or three years before you look at players who were pretty good for a long time, but never dominated. Even omitting the pre-WWI golfers who averaged only one major a year, you have at least Jones, Hagen, Nelson, Snead, Hogan, Arnie, Casper, Trevino, Miller, Seve, Watson, Norman, Faldo, and Rory, and you could make an argument for several others. For me, it's a tough call between Hogan and Watson for #3, but it's an easy call to put Snead, Arnie, Casper, and even Norman above Phil.
  30. You make the trip to Ireland and it's this windy, would you still play? Damn straight.
  31. As soon as you hit a bad shot you just say out loud to yourself, ‘Damn, it sure is hard trying to swing opposite handed.’
  32. In this century, in most years, the PGA is the strongest field in golf. Occasionally, the British is stronger. The British and US Opens are usually 2 and 3, and the Players is usually 4th. The Masters was as low as 7th as recently as 2014, with the Players and two WGCs, along with the other three majors, ahead of it. It makes sense if you think about it. The Masters is a short field to start with, and a dozen or more of the players have no chance to win -- amateurs, seniors, or players from very weak Asian tours who got invitations. Honestly, I'm surprised that it isn't behind two or three WGC's every year. You can find the strength of field of events on the world golf ranking site. Click on events, pick a year, and click on the strength of field column header to sort them. www.owgr.com
  33. Yes it does. You're caught up in thinking that it crosses an axis at 0 or something, or in that it measures a round's "performance" or something. Think about it this way. Two players are ten shots apart with their handicap indeces. When they play a course that's slope 113, their course handicaps are ten apart. When they play a course that's 155 slope, their course handicaps are 14 (10*155/113) apart. So say a course is rated 70.0 and the slope is 155. Two guys 10 handicap indeces apart should shoot 14 shots different. 63 (-7 * 113/155 = -5.1) versus 77 (7 * 113/155 = +5.1) = 10.2 (the 0.2 is because the 14 is actually 13.7). Think about what slope measures - how quickly the higher handicapper needs MORE shots from the lower handicapper relative to the gap between them. That math or logic doesn't change just because one person crosses through zero. They're still x spots away from each other on a number line. No, that's not what it does, because that's not what slope does. Slope measures the RELATIVE difficulty, not "the difficulty." They're wrong. Just think about it. I saw some of those articles, and they're just as wrong about it as you are. The USGA hasn't been doing this for decades and getting it wrong the whole time.
  34. I voted 70-90%. Generally, if I'm taking a little bit off of a shot, I'm going to grip down a bit. I'll do that maybe once or twice a round. I'll flight a wedge about once a round. I have never really been comfortable taking a little off of a shot. I have found just trying to take a little off a shot does not lead to good results. If I purposely try to swing slower, I tend to decel and hit a terrible shot. Contact with my 3/4 and 1/2 swings can be really inconsistent. In contrast, gripping down takes off a couple of yards and is pretty consistent. Flighting my wedges is less consistent - I can hit some pushes and some hooks. It's getting better. The real issue is that I don't devote practice time to hitting partial shots. I don't have a ton of practice time, so I'm using it to work on my priority piece generally. I don't have a ton of time to hit 3/4 shots with a lot of clubs to get a good feel for it. If the choice is to hit a 3/4 7 iron that I haven't practiced or hit a full 8 that I have practiced, I'm going to take the full 8.
  35. Welcome to TheSand Trap! I'll pile on with @Vinskand @NM Golf, you'll probably benefit from improvement to your full swing game. In particular, if your driver is inconsistent, you're either giving away strokes by hitting it poorly, or giving up distance by using a shorter club. Improve your driving, you'll probably improve your scoring. Hitting 40 balls a day is nice exercise, but if you're not working on a specific swing movement, you may simply be ingraining some poor mechanics. I'd suggest getting some good instruction. A good way to start is by posting your swing video in the Member Swing area of this site. Be sure to read the hidden contents to understand how to best film your swing, and how to post the video. https://thesandtrap.com/forums/forum/13-member-swings/ Last, to help make better decisions on the course, I suggest you buy a copy of Lowest Score Wins. Lowest Score Wins - Shoot Lower Scores on the Golf Course NOW Shoot lower scores on the golf course… NOW! The book presents a very detailed explanation of on-course decision making, as well as lots of other important information.
  36. BY chance are you a LAWYER? I am actually well versed in this as I ran restaurants for years, I just don't agree. Somewhat off topic, but I feel one of the biggest issues with our country is the fact we have become so litigious. If they want to hold the bartender liable, I can see that. They were directly involved in the situation. But the restaurant owner, come on? What did Tiger do? It's getting out of hand. Suing pharmaceutical companies for someone getting hooked on opioids seems as ridiculous as suing firearms manufacturers for people getting shot. All that is doing is driving up liability insurance prices so that lawyers can make more money.
  37. One of the goals of nearly every instructor is to get better at teaching. A lot of instructors say they learn something new every day. Erik has always said that if you can provide proof of something better than what he can offer, he would take it into consideration for his own teaching (or something like that). No one is perfect; no method is perfect. The best way for growth is to talk to those that have different views. Too many instructors get overly defensive of what they teach. Be humble, learn, grow. I heard a story that when Chris Como (pretty sure it was him) was first coming on the scenes as an instructor, he sent a video of his teaching to all the top 100 instructors for them to review and comment on. He wants to get better. The main goal of this site, I think, is to help golfers improve their own games. We all want to improve/grow and like instruction, one way to do that is talk about what you do. Be humble, learn, grow.
  38. Would that mean that if a person broke their arm whilst drunk they would be undeserving of medical treatment? Isn't it the condition and not the cause that is relevant ion this case?
  39. push cart with good umbrella for rain and sun is my ideal. stay drier on "cart path only" rainy days and stay cooler under constant shade/UV protection on hot/sunny days. nice to have freedom as a single. $15 seat fees can be spent on warm-up bucket and small meal instead. less mentally taxing to head toward my ball and get prepared for the next shot with all my gear than to focus on someone else's ball or get dropped off somewhere with just a club or two. easier to appreciate the natural beauty of the course and stay grounded. also easier to stay loose.
  40. The bad news is that I am really strapped for time right now, because I'm hosting several family members from around the country as we gather for a funeral. The good news is that I posted some material last month when you asked for foundational posts, that I think might translate well to twitter. In particular, the year-by-year analysis of Jack's alleged dominance in post #6430 could probably be trimmed down into one tweet for each year, especially if you remove my editorial snark. I've found that most golf fans are surprised to see how thin Jack's "dominance" was when you look at the Jack era year by year. He really had only one year that compared in dominance to any of seven years of Tiger's career. He had five years where he was clearly the best in the world (but not necessarily dominant), compared to 10 for Tiger. He only wins when you look at how many years he was arguably in the wold top ten -- 20 years to Tiger's 16 (so far). Being top ten in the world is very hard to do, but it's not domination. And I am as puzzled as you are how Brandel can be so oblivious to the strength of the fields in the pre-1980's majors. You only have to look at the Open.com website to see that in the 11 years 1959-1969, when the "Big Three" won five British Opens, there were never more than a dozen Americans in the field, and if you eliminate the amateurs and seniors, seldom more than half a dozen (zero in 1959, when Player won his first Open). There were never more than 30 (including seniors and amateurs) all through the 1970's. To be specific, look at 1968. The British Open paid $7200 to the winner. All but five regular PGA events paid over twice that much in 1968, and the Greater Milwaukee Open, played the same week as the British Open, paid the winner $40,000. In today's terms, that would be like having a regular PGA event with a first prize of 11 million dollars played the same week as the Open. There were 11 Americans in the field, but only six of any distinction, along with an amateur and four pros with a combined total of one career PGA win. And as inconvenient as trans-Atlantic travel was then, it wasn't nearly as tiring or expensive as travel to Britain from Australia or South Africa, which meant that even though the Open had far more prestige outside of the US than in it, it was missing a large percentage of international stars, as well as 90% of US stars. The field of the 1968 PGA Championship was described by Jack himself as "absurd and unfortunate," with about 50 touring pros and about 110 club pros. Just about the only way a non-PGA member could get in was to win one of the other majors, so foreign players who didn't want to devote a year or more to the PGA Tour were effectively shut out. The US Open was indeed open, but you had to qualify in the US a few weeks before the tournament, which meant that someone in Europe, South Africa, or Australia had to either commit to over a solid month of his time away from home, with no guarantee he would actually get to play, or make two overseas round trips in a month. As a result, only a handful of international players entered. All but one of Europe's leading money winners for the years 1955-1975 never played in either the US Open or the PGA Championship in their entire careers. The one exception, Peter Oosterhuis, never did it before 1975. After discounting amateurs and seniors, the 1968 Masters had only about 60 players in the field. Credit to the ANGC, they did make an effort to invite international players, but the time and expense (plus the fact that majors weren't MAJORS then) caused many invitees to decline. Peter Alliss was one of the best players in Europe for nearly 20 years. He won the Order of Merit twice, and beat the biggest American stars like Palmer, Venturi, and Casper in his Ryder Cup matches, but he was invited to the Masters only five times, and he only accepted twice. Too far to travel, he said. The result of all this is that the US Open was probably the strongest event of the Jack era, but with a virtually all-American field, it was only about half as strong as a full field major today. The PGA Championship, with two club pros for every touring pro, was probably no stronger than a regular PGA event of that era, and weaker than a regular PGA event of today. The Masters, with only 60 touring pros, was not much stronger. And the British Open, with just a handful of players from outside of Europe, was weaker than almost any regular tour event then, and much weaker than any of Tiger's official wins. Since the GOAT debate though most of the 60's was between Snead and Hogan, neither of whom had as many majors as Hagen, there was nothing like the pressure of majors today. A major was especially nice to win, but it wasn't a life-changing event like it is today. "Most majors" wasn't the most important stat until around 1975, thanks largely to years of lobbying by Jack, the only man who played all four majors every year. Note that this comparison doesn't depend on the fact that there is a much larger talent pool today, or that athletes in every sport have gotten much better than they were 50 years ago. Even if the players of the Jack era were as good as the players today, from the best in the world to the 100th in the world, it's still an incontrovertible fact that it was rare for half of them to show up for any given major. Also note that the relative strength of the US versus the rest of the world doesn't matter. Today, the world golf rankings show a pretty even distribution of Americans and non-Americans in the world's top players. But suppose it was 90-10 in favor of Americans in the Jack era. That would make the US Open relatively stronger, but still nowhere near today's majors. It wouldn't help the Masters or PGA much, since there were still only about 50 Americans in their fields. And it would make the British Open even weaker. The bottom line is, the reputations of the "Big Three" were built on winning majors with fields no stronger, and sometimes much weaker, than a regular PGA event today. Jack was less dominant, for fewer years, over weaker fields, than Tiger.
  41. It's a good video. I'm a proponent of ready golf and always encourage others to do so. Pretty much everyone I get paired up with feels the same. Unfortunately, I feel slow players are like bad drivers. The people who are the culprits rarely recognize it.
  42. I created a custom spreadsheet which I use with Game Golf, After rounds, I review my round on Game Golf and enter data into my spreadsheet. I call it "Game Improvement" and have graphs which show my trend in various increments. I've posted other details a few years back, but not able to locate presently.
  43. I have completely the opposite attitude. The whole point of the handicap system is to allow you to play better players on equal terms. So if you're playing off a ten handicap, you should expect (on a good day) to bogey the holes that are stroke index 1 to 10. I'm trying to become a better golfer. The way to do that is not to simply accept that I need to play a shorter course, it's to improve my game and reduce my handicap. True, when I visit a "monster course" - I've played a few Open Championship courses - I'm not playing off the championship tees, because ordinary mortals can barely reach the fairways from back there and can't remotely play the course as it's designed to be played. But in general, I'm absolutely having fun when when playing holes I'll struggle to make par on, because the point of playing is to challenge myself.
  44. I re-arranged the data into a chart showing the average rankings in Ball Speed, Accuracy (Lower Axis Tilt, Shot Area, Low Offline), and Consistency (Lower Std. Dev's in the categories for the rankings in the chart). I highlighted anything in the top 15. This is for higher swing speeds. Because it is self serving 😉 For me, I might be shying away from the MTB-X due to the inconsistency. The Vice Pro looks like pretty good bargain, just missing out of the top 15 in ball speed, but at $25 dollars a dozen may take over for me as the best deal if the MTB-X is that inconsistent. Just looking at the iron and wedge test, the MTB-Black is a beast. Very good in consistency on wedges and iron shots. Then it has the trifecta of being in the top 15 in ball speed, accuracy, and consistency with the driver. Come on Snell, just keep releasing the MTB-Black 😉
  45. If you can't reach a par 4 in two...play it as a par 5. Give yourself three to get there and two putts once you do. There is no shame in being realistic.
  46. I agree completely. Part of collegiate sports is learning to deal with adversity. If I were the coach, it would be a rainy day in hell before a kid who had withdrawn after nine holes because he was throwing a little hissy fit ever started again...
  47. Congratulations to @mellison24, @Grass Destruction, @Golfingdad, and @jshots for their recent addition to this esteemed group of "No Sixes" Challenge completionists. FWIW I don't think "not thinking about it" has much to do with it. I think about it all the time and rarely make a six.
This leaderboard is set to New York/GMT-04:00

  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • 2018 TST Partners

    PING Golf
    FlightScope Mevo
    More to come…
  • Posts

    • That's a good way of thinking about it, and in answer to the question, NOT ENOUGH
    • My guess is lot of folks simply bend sideways towards the target in an effort to keep weight forward instead of rotating in the backswing. And then reverse the bend in the downswing, causing them to come crashing down on the ball with a steep angle. Yes, minding first two keys(5S) with a good pivot solves 99 percent of my ills.
    • Firstly, well done for breaking 90, I am delighted for you. However, I am not sure what breaking 90 actually means, and I will tell you why. The last club I belonged to was a par 74 course, the new one I belong to is a par 67. Needless to say, breaking 90 on my old course was a far bigger achievement than doing it on my new one. Wouldn't it be more logical to say "I was 17 over" ?
    • I am a rubbish golfer, and have been for eight months. I know what to do, have been able to previously do it, but now find myself gradually getting worse. The crazy thing is that I still enjoy it, because I have the right attitude, and know I am getting older. Fresh air, great company, and the opportunity to stay fit, so what else matters ?
    • @chspeed, what kind of ball flight are you getting? BTW, good turn rates above. Not much goat humping. 

  • 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...