Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 02/20/2019 in all areas

  1. Yep! And hard headed 15 hcps who refuse to shoot better scores because of their ego!
  2. First I want to be sure that we are talking about the same thing. A "bump and run" has traditionally been a shot that is "bumped" into a hill or mound short of the putting surface to kill the speed and let the ball roll to the hole. It's been a common shot in links golf, in part because of the design of the courses, and because wind can so often be a factor for any shot that spends too much time in the air. With the proliferation of high loft wedges, the bump and run isn't seen as often these days, but I did see a pro use it a couple of weeks ago in a PGA Tour tournament. It sounds like what you are describing is just a routine chip, using a lower lofted club to get the ball rolling as soon as possible. Once again, it's a shot not seen as much in the modern game because of the variety of wedges that so many players carry. Also, the greens are so much faster than they used to be that controlling the roll out from a 7 iron "chip and roll" tends to be more difficult than pitching the ball 1/3 to 1/2 of the distance and allowing for less roll. I used to be an advocate of the chip and roll, and used to use a 8 iron a lot around the greens. I don't carry 4 wedges like so many do these days... my highest loft is 56 degrees. However, I now use my 51 degree gap wedge for about 95% of my greenside chips and pitches.
  3. Not a tough crowd.... we are just golfers. In particular, those of us who regularly participate in the Rules forum believe that the rules exist for a reason, and we believe in playing by those rules even in casual rounds (anything other than a declared "practice" round). We do this in part because we want our handicaps to be a s accurate as possible, and because most of us find he game more enjoyable when we test ourselves under the same rules and procedures every time we play. I play all of those shots by the rules because I don't want to be completely befuddled when I encounter them in tournament play. I've played shots where I had to hit right through a twig more than once over the years - that's one where you really don't have any idea what might happen. Playing through a leaf is insignificant. I've done it often in autumn when leaves are a constant issue,and regardless of whether the ball lies in grass or sand, it makes no real difference. I've played shots where I couldn't even see the ball when I took my stance. Sometimes you simply have to do it, even if it means that you can't make the shot you would have preferred if the object had not interfered. Even after the latest attempt at simplification, the rules are still biased toward playing the ball as it lies in the vast majority of awkward situations that you can encounter. Doing so only when you are in a competition is giving away some advantage to those like me who are not intimidated or deterred by a difficult lie.
  4. I just bought new clubs after 10 years. I bought new M4 irons, an M-4 5 wood, a Callway Epic Flash driver, two Cleveland CBX wedges, and an Odyssey Stroke Lab putter. I had one spot left in the bag, so I bought a Cleveland "chipper" wedge. I have never been good at chipping. After two rounds using the chipper, I am completely sold on it. Last round, I had two chip from bad lies that got within 3 feet, and made the putt. It's very easy to use. You simply use a putting stroke, and the ball always goes straight and low. I know there is a prejudice among golfers against this club. But it's so easy to use, it's almost like cheating. Anyone else here use a chipper? If so, do you like it?
  5. It will be broadcast on NBC on the weekend, Woods paired w/DeChambeau (aka SLIG) and Ancer. World Golf Championships-Mexico Championship - English Version PGA TOUR
  6. 1 point
    This isn't apart of my normal road to championship stuff, but just something I thought about a lot in the Kuchar caddy payment thread. Part of the Kuchar issue is what role the caddy actually played, in his win. But, it begs the larger question of what does a caddy really do for a Tour player? Besides the normal role of carrying a bag and raking bunkers, etc., a caddy is, imo, in essence a GPS for the player, a support person, and sometimes a coach. Not that the player can't get the info on their own or that they don't already. But, a player does not make it to the PGA Tour because of a caddy. Many of these guys played in college without caddies. They were already top athletes before they decided to hire an extra hand. They made or bought their own yardage books and marked them up with notes during practice rounds, they found their own yardages, they decided what shots to play throughout the round, they played through any emotional stress, etc, all without a caddy to get to where they are. I said before that a caddy is like a GPS. Well, GPS's should be able to speed up pace of play. A player using a caddy should be able to make decisions faster, and I think this is true most of the time. But I'm sure there are cases where the caddy second guesses the player and then they sit there for 5min debating what idea is best. The real question, I think, is how many strokes is gained purely for a caddy helping by way of being a GPS? I'd say it's a pretty small number and definitely not a stroke per round, because all the info given is something the player can already do for themselves and pace of play is laughable on tour. Another part that a caddy helps with is emotion / mental support. Especially for newer players on Tour who may have a lot of jitters, having a support person to keep the noise (distractions like all the bill boards with their name, pic and stats, all the people or audible noises, and then the typical noise like bunkers or hazards to try and ignore) in check can mean something. Keep you focused on the game when needed and not the emotions that come with the game. After a bad shot or maybe in between shots, distracting the player to make them feel more content. A player doesn't want to be on overdrive or pissed, there's a middle ground where the best golf can be played and having a caddy to help keep you there can save one from a stupid decision or rushed swing. Again, how many strokes can be gained from having a caddy for emotional / mental support? I'd say it's definitely higher than the GPS caddy, but still not a lot. The last part a caddy could help with is by being a coach. This could go either way as for how helpful it is. No one should really be trying to change their swing or routine in the middle of a round as it usually creates more problems than it solves. But like in the case of Holmes in the final round this last weekend, the caddy actually helped adjust his set up with his driver in the middle of the round, and he seemed to hit the ball a bit better after that. It's hard to assign a value here to potential strokes gained, because I don't think it's very common. I could be wrong. Either way, most players, I'd assume, have some sort of back up plan should their swing go haywire, so having a caddy there for this purpose may not be needed. As far as the local caddy vs normal caddy topic, from my own experience at Pinehurst #2, the caddy that was given to our group supposedly knew every crevasse and slope but routinely mis-read breaks on the greens. Maybe he was doing a half-assed job intentionally or maybe he really didn't know the course. Either way, he didn't help for being a GPS caddy (because of having a yardage book and rangefinder) and he definitely didn't help for being a support or mental help caddy. My experience is just one example but a local caddy is unlikely to provide any emotional support to anyone unless they know each other, but may help as far as a GPS caddy. For Kuchar's case, he played/walked the course before marking all his notes, etc. I doubt he needed the caddy for helping with GPS-like stuff, and because the two didn't know each other, the caddy wasn't really a support person. He definitely filled the role of carrying a bag and raking bunkers, but there likely wasn't more to it than that. So, what is a caddy worth? Is it worth paying a few thousand dollars a round for the potential stroke(s) gained on the field? I doubt it's a physical issue because those guys could just as easily carry their own super light bag with a few balls, etc (or I assume push carts are acceptable, just frowned upon). Unless you hire a local caddy, you'd have to pay someone a livable wage for them to constantly travel with you. Or maybe it's not about the golf at all, it's about traveling with someone instead of being bored outside of playing. I don't know. Either way, I think caddies play a minimal role in the performance of the player.
  7. Well, opinions are like @$$holes everyone has one. … most people think other people's stink. My opinion, based on your answers is just get the free fitting. You already know which irons you want. You aren't looking for a lesson. Save your cash for a lesson from a person you trust. Again, just my opinion. Do let us know how it turns out.
  8. 1 point
    I think you summed up the why do use caddies pretty well in three reasons: Pack mule / course maintenance GPS / course scout / game manager Emotional Support / Coaching I think the real question is why do pros maintain a regular caddie as opposed to using someone different each week. I think the answer is obviously NOT #1 and obviously YES to #3. But I think #2 is an interesting issue. I would imagine most tour stops have good local caddies - I must assume that Riviera has some good caddies that really know the course so well they might be an advantage over a regular caddie - think the guy Crenshaw used at Augusta. But I would guess some of the issues with using a local caddie are: 1) there's probably not one for the entire field; 2) how do you know / do you have confidence that you are getting a good one? Still I'm a little surprised no head strong pro has tried the "local caddie" strategy. Maybe because there might be more downside than upside. I don't know if this will work but this links to an article from two years ago where a tour pro talks about what the tour would be like if there were no caddies. Undercover Tour Pro: What If We Had To Play Without Caddies? - Golf Digest Here's the question: What would the World Ranking look like if we had to carry our bags? No caddies. Also, FWIW, there was an interview podcast last year with Webb Simpson's caddie right after he won the Players. He talked about one of the things he does to prepare for a big round is prepare a list of non-golf things to talk about to keep Webb from thinking about golf every minute of the round.
  9. nevets88

    Blitzball

    OK, if you can curve the ball like that, the strike zone should be way smaller. Batter has no chance.
  10. Welcome to TST. We're glad you've joined.
  11. One of those small Nerf footballs with the fins on the back? Anyways, here's an article from Anya Alvarez, professional golfer who was hit with a slow play penalty IRL, and her viewpoint. Fifty seconds for a one-foot putt: Is slow play killing golf? | Sport | The Guardian JB Holmes frustrated fans and fellow pros with a five-and-a-half hour round...
  12. They didn't "change" the reference point so much as they created the idea of a reference point in all situations. In dropping from shoulder height, too many people stood on the line and dropped to the side. That's now possible/allowed when before it was technically a breach. By establishing a reference point for back-on-a-line, the rules procedures for dropping have more in common and are thus simpler. You still use the point at which the ball last crossed the margin (or where the ball sits for example in a bunker), but those points are not the actual "reference point" in this situation. In 2018 you basically had to try to drop ON the reference point. In 2019 you drop in the area DEFINED by the reference point. But again that's not "the reference point." When you take relief for ground under repair, you create a new "reference point" that is neither "where the ball last crossed into the penalty area" or "the spot where the ball lies after the previous stroke." So they've standardized what the actual "reference point" is. Those other things you listed are no longer "reference points" in this sense. They help steer you TO the reference point, but they're just "points." I'll put it another way: The relief area is the area defined by a reference point and a club measurement, often 1 but occasionally 2, in ALL relief situations. I raised the general issue about how if you drop and your ball rolls two inches forward you're still "back on a line" to some extent, and how that shouldn't be a penalty, really… but there's something to be said for keeping things consistent. Which is why they didn't change this one to be, say, a one-club-length radius circle. No relief area (outside of replaying from the teeing area) is really larger than a half circle. Just mark your "back on a line" reference point with a tee and be done with it. Small price to pay for consistent rules in this portion of the game, IMO. This. Even for free drops and "nearest point of relief" type drops, which may not have to do with "where the ball lie" or "where it crossed the margin of something." Plus not many players would choose to drop on a downslope. Not if there's flatter ground nearby. I agree. (Lands in, comes to rest in, and is played from… the ball can leave the relief area so long as it comes back into it, Dave. 😄)
  13. 1 point
    Interesting subject to discuss. I mostly go long with your ideas. Outside of the physical effort of carrying the bag and grooming the course, I imagine one of the biggest reasons every pro has a caddie is because they can have one. And they are afraid that IF a caddie might make a 1 or 2 stroke difference, then they sure as hell want to have that advantage when everyone else in the field has a caddie.
  14. They had a specific reason for lowering the drop height...to decrease the ball rolling away, and so decrease the number of re-drops and eventual placing of the ball. That would not have been accomplished by allowing a range like you suggest. And really, the old rules didn't allow for any more flexibility than the new ones.
  15. I think the procedure has been made more consistent throughout. Any time you have to drop a ball, you establish a reference point, which then defines the relief area. The requirements for the reference point may vary from rule to rule, but you ALWAYS have a reference point, and the relief is always within a specific distance from that reference point. The limitations for the relief area also vary somewhat, but there's always a specific relief area, and the ball when dropped has to hit the ground within the relief area, and remain in the relief area. Its only when you don't specifically establish a reference point that the rules step in to define the reference point for you. But really, this isn't an additional opportunity to "game the system". No matter where the reference point is, you can still drop right at the edge of the relief area and hope the ball will end up outside of it. In this aspect the new rules make it a little more likely that you will eventually be able to place the ball, the ball when dropped doesn't have to move very far to end up outside the relief area. This is counterbalanced by the lower drop height, the ball just won't bounce or roll as far. This certainly is a change from the old rules, but to me the procedures are more consistent than before. Determine reference point, determine relief area based on the reference point, and drop so the ball lands in and stays in the relief area.
  16. That's amazing, I love it! I wonder if someone will bring out a frisbee or something one day, to pass the time. 😁
  17. They're all good options, depending on the situation and the ground you are running on. But I, personally, like to use the same wedge every time. If you always use the same wedge, your rollout is very consistent. you really only have to judge how the slope will affect rollout, rather than having an added intangible of different rollouts for different clubs.
  18. In which case the rules of the game should apply. What are the chances of hitting a fairway and finding your ball in a divot? But when it happens you still hit out of it. Or you find your ball (not on the green) with a nice hunk of mud on it. It happens.
  19. Why wouldn’t you practice a shot that you very well might encounter on the course? Especially something as simple and benign as that...with no worry about injury, or damaging a club. Play the shot and revel in the result of having done so.
  20. Yup. And what is even more remarkable is the PGA Tour players will exceed that time when they are a twosome in the final round. Two players taking longer than 2.5 hours is absurd.
  21. My goals for 2019 are as follows: Learn to hit the ball consistently straight! make sure my set up is correct and get the basics correct first. My main aim is to be able to play a round of golf ! Im still learning the trade in the range atm Lots of videos and advice from places like this should make achieving my goal easier 🙂
  22. 4:40 for a foursome is an hour longer than it should be
  23. People I like… and see in person. 🙂 I thought that the "hand out" part gave that away. 😄
  24. In many cases it takes less precision to use a club with some bounce, like a wedge. Also, in certain types of grasses, the bump and run isn't very reliable, the ball's first bounce can be really "sticky". If you check out the instructional content here, you'll find some good stuff about pitching and chipping:
  25. As far as I know, the PGA Tour functions as the Committee in setting pace of play policy. Here is the PGA Tour Player Handbook from last season, the Pace of Play policy starts on page 71. https://qualifying.pgatourhq.com/static-assets/uploads/2017-18_pga_tour_handbookregs_final.pdf As far as I am aware, the PGA Tour responds pretty well to the Players Advisory Council. If enough concerned players get themselves elected to the Council, they could have a huge role in revising the Pace of Play policy. MY interpretation, the players don't want to enact a policy that could result in the player getting hit with a penalty stroke. They CHOOSE to make it extremely difficult to play slow enough for long enough to get a penalty. There may be a few vocal individuals, but as a group they've chosen to keep things as they are.
  26. From your description, this sounds like it could be one of two things: 1) You could be someone with a significantly less steep swing than you thought, and you're picking the ball with an inline position through impact. 2) You could be flipping the clubhead through impact which usually results in a very high ball flight on shots that manage to catch the correct portion of the face. It's significantly less consistent, however. The only way to really tell for sure which case applies to you is to take video of your swing. If you post it here we can take a look and help you determine whether it's a case of flipping the clubhead or just a shallow swing through impact. That said, I take divots with every wedge and iron in my bag from 60* up to 3i. For me, personally, not taking a divot is a sign that I was either flipping the clubhead or pulling my chest and shoulders up out of the swing prematurely (for me it's usually the latter, I don't flip very often). If I'm trying to hit a high shot my swing will take a shallower divot, but it's always there and I feel it gives me more margin for error at impact. I can hit the ball a touch thin or a hair chunky and still get a good result, but someone who's a picker can only really miss the ball thin if the swing doesn't take a divot.
  27. They could use the course's or PGA Tour's pace rating. For my PGA chapter, if our groups, in pro ams, don't play in 4hr40min or within 15min of the group in front, we get penalized a stroke onto our 18th hole score. I think regardless of the method used, there would have to be proper penalties or enforcement. No warnings, just add a stroke (just 1 per round should do it for these guys).
  28. How did he short the caddy? He paid more than the agreed upon amount, what part of that equates to shorting the caddy on his pay? The caddy was paid less than traveling caddies who stay with their players week in and week out, but the caddy was paid more than the agreed upon amount between the caddy and Kuchar. How can you lose respect for a guy who not only pays his debts, but overpays them?
  29. Right, my only point was that one event isn't proof of much of anything. I think Tour caddies can be over-paid, but at the same time, their guys are one injury away from struggling to find another bag or something. And they are away from their families, etc. too.
  30. Mike, I think it's not about his networth or his lifestyle. It's about what his usual caddie bill would have been anyway. He would have paid as he has done throughout his career I am sure. I don't think it was a 'screw job' or anything malicious, but it's hard to have sympathy for those who do the absolute minimum necessary toward their obligations when the opportunity presents itself. Even less so for those are arguably fortunate. That's cheap. It may not be a crime but image is fragile.
  31. Justin Thomas, Bubba Watson, Ian Poulter. Still rubbed wrong way by Justin Thomas having someone kicked out of a tournament for shouting something like "get in the rough!" when his ball was already in the air. Seemed like such a petty, douche-baggy (not a word, but should be) thing to do. Bubba seems like a big hicky crybaby to me. Poulter just seems monumentally annoying. All three are golf villains to me, and I'd generally root for someone else to beat them. Not claiming that my descriptions of them are are even faintly accurate. Just a feeling.
  32. I can tell you this, I'm coaching a boys golf team this year (high school) and I have two players. I have had one match cancelled because the school we were playing doesn't even have a team and the other match only had 6 total players (including my two). Most golf teams numbers are down. It's actually the same for football in this area (numbers are down). Why go out and practice and be good at something when you can sit in your living room, eat junk food, and be a legend on X-box. I'm a physical education teacher...and I'm here to tell you are kids are getting fat...really fat. I didn't have one 7th grader (180 kids) who could do 20 push ups. It's sad.
  33. What happened to golf? Over the past 40 years I would have to say: 1. Television, technology, too many distractions. Easier to do something else. 2. Just like expansion in other professional sports--the pool of good players is only so big and the increase in tournaments and level of play has been saturated by what would really be called mediocre professionals... 3. Lack of commitment...to be good at anything you need to practice and commit to it. 4. In many instances, cost as compared to what you can do with the same amount of money. Like the movie theaters, cost of admission and snacks will scare the hell out of a $100 bill todayl... 5. Time--for many, they just won't set aside a half a day for golf...by time you travel to and from the course, play 18 holes, you have shot 6 hours... 6. Generational differences...us older guys are not driven by how fast something is (other than women and cars) like the younger generations that wants instantaneous gratification and they tire of things quicker today.
This leaderboard is set to New York/GMT-04:00


×
×
  • 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...