Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 12/08/2019 in all areas

  1. A little closer to target line. Forgot to angle it steeper though, the front stick. I love South Florida this time of year. This is Miami Shores, renovating, no grass. The previous is Crandon. I used a tee the second time at Crandon, made things a lot easier.
  2. I still don’t understand that. Where does one find the reference for “par for handicap”?
  3. Makes you wonder how much he fluffs his lie in thick grass. Unrelated (but also, related):
  4. saevel25

    NCAA Football 2019

    On a side note, I’m claiming OSU will have partial the NC if LSU wins. We did give them their QB... 😉
  5. klineka

    NCAA Football 2019

    That's how you're backing up your claim? C'mon man that's pathetic.
  6. klineka

    NCAA Football 2019

    They should have thought of that when they decided to schedule Wofford, Citadel, and Charlotte for some of their nonconference games. Also I have a really hard time believing that a team that only put up 21 points and squeaked out a victory against UNC should be #1 over both LSU and OSU. Why do you think Clemson should be #1?
  7. Badgers to the Rose Bowl! Badgers kill Oregon, and Michigan beats Alabama! OSU beats Clemson and then LSU Sorry @Vinsk
  8. Yeah, if you want to be picky, it could have been steeper. But whatever, it's still the idea that it's there. Just miss it by "more" if it's a little too shallow. Y'know?
  9. No. That generally happens as a result of good sequencing. The hands start slowing down near A6, and the clubhead catches up. Well, let them put the grip six to ten inches out from their hips, because your hands aren't attached at the hips - the grip of the club is away from your body a little, increasing the radius. So let them increase the radius a little, too. 🙂
  10. I think the advocates for no upper body should just simply duct tape their clubs to their belt buckles and play gold that way. Take the arms, wrists, and hands out of it. By the way... Your MAX swing speed will be maybe 25 mph using a shaft hooked to your belt.
  11. I believe this statement is incorrect (see Appendix F quote below). It also seems to imply that it is the player’s responsibility to determine the par of each hole for purposes of handicap posting. If so, this is contradicted several places in the 2020 Rules of Handicapping. Definition of par: “The score that a scratch player would generally be expected to achieve on a hole under normal course and weather conditions, allowing for two strokes on the putting green (see Appendix F). The Authorized Association or, at the discretion of the National Association, the golf club is responsible for adjudicating par (see Appendix A).” [emphasis added] From Appendix A: "Apply and/or communicate the stipulated procedures for establishing par...” is a listed responsibility for everyone except the player. Also from Appendix A, the Golf Club/Handicap committee is responsible for “Display a Course Handicap and Playing Handicap adjustment table for each set of tees, for players’ reference.” Par is part of the calculations of Course Handicap and Playing Handicap. From Appendix E: “The Rules of Golf state: “The Committee is responsible for publishing on the scorecard or somewhere else that is visible (for example, near the first tee) the order of holes at which handicap strokes are to be given or received. (See Rules of Golf, Committee Procedures, Rule 5I (4)). It is recommended that a stroke index allocation be applied over 18-holes, split into six triads with each hole ranked on its playing difficulty relative to par.” So assignment of par is implied here also. From Appendix F: “It is important that an accurate par be established for each hole on a golf course for both men and women, and these values should be printed alongside each hole on the scorecard.” (Explicitly states that the scorecards cannot “say whatever they want.”)
  12. By why would they? You need an accurate par to calculate your "playing handicap", to determine what net double bogey is and to score in forms of play such as Stableford.
  13. Dude, we're on page 10. You're going to have to be more specific. If you're referring to the video in the first post, it's not meant to be completely scientific. It's meant to be illustrative, and I feel that it is. Two additional points: 1) My arms were not "loose" in the first swings, and 2) the shoulders (which move the arms) count as "the arms" for the purposes of this discussion. Those two points address almost everything else you've got to say: You keep substituting "tense" or "stiff" when I'm saying the muscles are working or active. Tense/stiff isn't the same as active/working. You leave out that the muscles which move the arms across your chest, etc. are part of your "arms" for this discussion. They move the arms relative to your torso, etc. My arm muscles are not "passive" at all. Nor are the muscles which move the arms relative to my torso, which I've included in the discussion as "arms." Look at the way the arms work in a long driver. They're anything but "passive." Look at how far Jamie Sadlowski can still drive the ball from his knees. He's limited in his rotation and his ability to use the ground for jumping, but his arms can still move across his chest, fold, lift, etc. Again, the muscles which move the arms relative to the torso are part of the "arms" for this discussion. There's no such thing in a good golf swing. The arms contribute speed and power and expend effort. That video is stupid, man. "Try running with stiff legs"? Again, you're just substituting the word "stiff" when I'm saying the arm muscles (and those that move the arms) are WORKING, expending effort. They're not just limp ropes hanging from the shoulder socket. Working muscles don't have to be stiff. The guy who wins the race in that video has legs that are WORKING. This is a horrible straw man. Never have I said to make your arms "stiff." You're misunderstanding what "relaxed" means. By "relaxed" I mean not working, I don't mean "stiff." C'mon man. No, it's not. His arm (and the muscles that move his arm) are working hard and contributing the vast majority of the speed of a pitch.
  14. Driver is ordered, or at least it will be on Monday through the learning center at Neshanic. Got a little bit of a deal on it, too, because they sell Ping clubs and the county had their annual gift card sale recently. Too bad they don't sell Mizuno - the irons are significantly more expensive.
  15. iacas

    NCAA Football 2019

    @Vinsk, I’ll delete your posts if you keep posting them in 36 point fonts. Paste as plain text please. We’re not all blind like you seem to be. 🙂 My only other point is this: it’s high time the two of you just made a wager and then let it play out. So do that.
  16. Driver can go just as straight. You've just got to figure out why for you it isn't. But before diving into that, you must realize that the less loft, longer shaft, more ball speed, and longer distance is by nature harder to hit straighter. Driver isn't about hitting it straight; if you can play a predictable and somewhat consistent shape, then do it. Driver is all about giving yourself as short of a shot into the green, whilst keeping it in play, as possible. Distance is the premium here, but obviously no good if it's not in play. That said, you need to look at strike first of all. If you're not hitting it out of the middle, all bets are off. Start there. Then look at controlling face to path. For a functional draw, you want the face to point inside of the path in which you are swinging. The ball should start right and bend back to target, but optimally not cross it. The opposite is true for a fade. There is nothing wrong with a bit of shape so long as you can play it. If you struggle with a push fade (i.e., a ball starting right, going more right), you're starting the ball out to the right and that is fine if you want to eventually get a draw, but you gotta get the ball to curve back. My suggestion would be to get the feeling of the club head winning the race through the ball, instead of the grip. This will give you more club head speed and allow the club head to "catch up" and release through the shot. Be careful not to pull the ball or hit the ball out of the toe in an effort to make the ball draw back; that's a cheater way of doing it that will only bite you. If you struggle with a hook, I really recommend getting a driver that allows you to open the face at address and then gripping the club in your hands with the face open. That will give you freedom to sling the head but without fear of the ball going left. I have a Callaway Rogue Draw 9* that I have set -1* and I reinstalled the grip to that change. Now, my driver sits flush on the ground with an open face to allow me to throw the head through the ball without a hook. You might wonder why I have a Draw version; I like the draw version because I like the feeling of the weight of the head like that. If you want advice on how to hit a nice fade, you'll need to talk to someone else haha 🙂. I don't hit fades very well. I know the science behind it, but I have a natural draw pattern and I cannot execute a fade pattern; it ends up being a straight push or push fade. 100%. I understand a person's fear of driver. I've been there. It's no fun not being able to play golf because you're losing balls and getting out of position. You've just got to take time away from playing and go practice and fix driver. Driver is a must, in my opinion. You can't get away from it unless you're Stenson. You're giving up more than you are gaining when you look at the numbers. It may not seem like it when every tee ball goes OB or in the water, but if you take the time to learn how to hit driver and hit it well, you'll play so much better in the long run. Driver confidence bleeds into the rest of your game as well.
  17. saevel25

    NCAA Football 2019

    Just saying... I think beating 5 teams in the top 20% of college football is pretty good. Also, Bill Connelly made a good point. What benefit did Oregon get by getting beat by Auburn early in the season? What if they played someone easier and won. They would have a good claim to be the #4 team over OU.
  18. klineka

    NCAA Football 2019

    Yes OSU struggled in the first half, but they dominated the second half. They have played Wisconsin (ranks 6th nationally in offensive efficiency) twice this season and held them to a total of 28 points, and held Jonathan Taylor (some consider to be the best RB in the country) to 200 rushing yards and 1 rushing TD over two full games when he has averaged 146 ypg and 1.6 rushing TDs per game this season. I think their offenses are about equal (OSU team offensive efficiency is 95.9, and LSU's is 96.3) but I give the edge to OSU on defense (90.2 defensive efficiency rating compare to LSU at 76.8). Holding Georgia to 10 points is a bit misleading because Georgia was missing multiple of their top receivers due to injuries, suspension for the first half, etc so that receiver core that Fromm had to throw to yesterday simply wasnt good enough to keep up with LSU's scoring. OSU's offense is significantly better than what Georgia had out there yesterday. LSU gave up 38 to Vanderbilt (ranked 106th in offensive efficiency) and 37 to OleMiss (62nd in offensive efficiency) OSU gave up more than 21 points just one time the entire season, and never gave up more than 30, LSU gave up more than 21 points 5 times and more than 30 points 4 times. Even if you think that LSU's offense is better than OSU's (which it might be but only ever so slightly IMO) I dont think the gap between the offenses is wide enough for LSU make up for the gap that exists between the defenses which is why I think OSU should be slightly ahead of LSU.
  19. It was a good run Mary Hardin. 2019 Division III Football Official Bracket | NCAA.com The official 2019 College Football Bracket for Division III. Includes a printable bracket and links to buy NCAA championship tickets.
  20. Winn Dri-Tac grips are great for arthritic hands.
  21. The penalty for not raking a bunker is being the sort of person who doesn't rake bunkers.
  22. My association sent out an email to all professionals or whomever is in charge of the course, to send the most recent scorecard with updated pars/allocations so that the database and scorecards are the same. We are not required to change anything, they just recommend certain things. For eg we have a short looking par 5 on scorecard but it goes wayyy uphill. Instead of 450ish, it plays like 500 or more. I’m guessing this first year will be a little hectic.
  23. I'd pay it to play Pebble. But if I were doing that, I'd set aside like $3k-$4k so I could fly out and play a bunch of northern/middle California courses at once. Pebble, Spyglass, Poppy, Spanish Bay, Pacific Grove, Pasatiempo, TPC Harding Park ... definitely missing some. I wouldn't just fly in, play Pebble, and go home.
  24. I got a response from Dr Thomas Raffel. Copied directly from my email. Dear Mr. Jones, Yes, a student of mine (Patrick Long, copied) did an experiment last year, testing effects of pond submersion on golf ball performance. It was a fun side project for us. I agreed to the study because it seemed like a good learning opportunity for Patrick. Full disclosure, the owner of Golfballdivers.com (Alex) suggested the study and provided funding to support part of Patrick's summer pay that year. Alex's company also covered costs of sending the golf balls out to a testing facility in California. However, I insisted on a stipulation in the grant contract, giving us permission to publish our results regardless of outcome. Patrick is still planning to submit a manuscript based on his work for publication in a peer-review journal. So, I'm not free to share the full manuscript publicly just yet. However, Patrick agreed to let me share some of the study details with you. The experiment was inspired by an article by Farrickers in Gold Digest (1996) that reported reduced performance in 2-piece and 3-piece golf balls (unspecified brand) following submergence in water. However, the methodological details were vague, the article wasn't peer-reviewed, and there have been changes in golf ball technology since 1996. We predicted that there might be less performance loss in newer golf balls with urethane elastomer covers. We focused on Titleist Pro V1 because of its popularity, and because Alex said they commonly retrieve golf balls of this type from water hazards. We submerged golf balls in water-hazard ponds on our campus golf course, placing them in mesh cages (modified minnow traps) to make retrieval easier. The total sample size was 144 balls: 96 submerged and 48 control. The submerged balls were distributed among 12 cages, placed at multiple depths in 3 different ponds. We retrieved 24 balls per time point at 1, 3, 5, and 11 months post-submersion. To reproduce the procedure used by golf-ball-diving companies, we cleaned each ball with a mild detergent and microfiber cloth. We compared submerged balls from each time point to a group of 12 unsubmerged "control" balls, which we had saved from the same manufacturing batch. Half of the control balls were washed with the same procedure to control for possible washing effects. We marked each ball with a randomly assigned code number and mixed the Control balls with the Pond balls, to ensure testers would be blind to treatment, and we sent the balls off to a commercial golf-ball-testing facility in California. They tested each ball's performance using a robotic system and sent us the data. We analyzed the results with general linear regression, focusing on testing for effects of Treatment (Pond vs Control), Time point (i.e., testing batch), and a Treatment*Time interaction. Our primary response variables were Total Distance and Carry Dispersion. Contrary to my personal expectations, we weren't able to detect statistically significant effects on golf ball performance even after a full year of pond submergence. There was a non-significant trend towards Control balls moving farther than Pond balls in the full model, but this effect was small with limited statistical support. We didn't detect treatment effects on carry dispersion or ball mass. It's possible the results might have differed with a different type of ball, or in a different aquatic environment. For example, there's a published study that documented severe damage to golf balls exposed to fast-flowing stream or ocean environments. I'm sorry I can't share additional details just yet. It sounds like Patrick is eager to get the manuscript submitted for publication in the next month or so, and if it gets accepted somewhere, all the details including the data will become publicly available at that time. On another note, I am not a golfer and I don't plan to do additional work on this subject, so it doesn't matter to me whether the results of Patrick's experiment convince anyone or not. But, I'm happy to defend the rigor of my student's work. Sincerely, Tom Raffel I thanked him for his time and appreciated his quick response. I'm not judging, just relaying information.
  25. Wow. I am bad at stick placement. I need to retake stick placement 101. Way closer to target line made swing better.
  26. Would it be out of line to suggest spending some time on the range with your driver? How tough is the rough you are playing? Would 20-30 yards be worth hitting a club that is a bit less accurate? I can't imagine giving up distance for hitting it "straight" or "straighter". I'd suggest going to the range and fixing whatever issue that you think you have with driver. I used to play with a 4i off the tee, which netted me 180 yards. I gained 50 yards off the tee with 2 range sessions with a driver. It was worth more than I could have imagined.
  27. Piz

    Leaf Pile

    According to the Official Exceptions to the Rules of Golf; a ball hiding in the leaves may be declared "furtive" and the player may drop, without penalty, in a location deemed to be reasonably appropriate.
  28. Do you have any video's of average golfers who are able to swing 100 mph all arms...no lower body?
  29. Where do your arms generate speed from? I have yet to see a MLB pitcher throw without a windup. What are you trying to accomplish here?
This leaderboard is set to New York/GMT-04:00

  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Affiliates

    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    FlightScope Mevo
    Use the code "iacas" for 10% off Mevo
  • Posts

    • Depends on how serious you take a 2-ft putt. If you go through your routine, you might add 5-10 minutes? Just guessing.  Probably more uncommon than just giving putts. 
    • So, I gotta ask... if there is any kind of competition, why are you giving them 1 footers?  They'll obviously make most of them, but once in a while they'll miss and it is to your advantage.
    • Haha, yeah it seems to work.  🤷‍♂️
    • I putt everything outside of ~6-8 inches out, and try to putt as many inside that as I can without interrupting my playing partners. People who give themselves putts are only hurting themselves by artificially lowering their handicaps. Plenty of video of PGA Tour pros missing putts inside 2 or even 1 feet. I missed a 2 footer yesterday. It happens. It doesn't happen often, but it happens.
    • I think what I am going to start on is going to be the same for me. Swing left for everything, lol. 

  • 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...