Golfingdad

This is a good reason (not all times, of course, if there is a big carry) why there’s no reason to “pitch out” because even if I don’t hit it crisply, I still hit it and it goes 30-60 yards in the right direction.

Assuming no lip issues, I just put the ball back in my stance an inch or two and really try and hit down on it. It's the same thing I do if my ball happens to be in a divot hole, or a muddy lie ... any situation where too much ground too soon is gonna really screw the shot up I focus on only hitting ball. If there are lip issues, then it's still the same shot, but you have to choose the club that you know is going to clear it first.

Agreed. There are a lot of people out there who said 18>14 and now say 18>15, and I have no doubt some of them will insist that 18>18 and even 18>19 if it ever comes to that.

I most remember watching you go for the green on #2 at Mid South on the second day (and maybe in the singles too??). That was fun to watch. :) Anybody on the fence about applying, just go for it - you won't regret it!

If Federer didn’t have Nadal and Djokovic he’d have several more majors, almost undoubtedly ... but that would not necessarily mean that he’d have been a better tennis player. Quite possibly the opposite might be true. Without them to push him, it’s easier for him to win and his drive is lower. I believe that’s the argument your making? I’m cool with that.

You will find many posts that explain the strength of field argument very well. In fact, there is an entire other thread specifically devoted to that one topic. You (and several others) argue that Jack faced better competition and the proof is a bunch of names of great players who have won several more majors each than the collection of players Tiger has had to face. The counter to that, though, is that if there are fewer players in Tigers day with more majors, then there are more players with majors, hence several more players he has to beat each week. Alongside this point, they’ll also remind you that half the fields in Jacks era were club pros, whereas in Tigers era the vast majority of guys teeing it up all had a legit shot at winning.

My guess: There's nothing about him (yet) to draw fans or create non-fans. He's incredibly good, but really boring, and we don't really know anything about him. His closest comparison on the course is probably DJ because he's also pretty robotic and emotionless while golfing. But he's all kinds of interesting off the course with his social-media/wife/suspension/drugs??/injuries etc etc. He's level headed but colorful. Koepka is ... there. Man that 5th hole ...

LOL, me neither but after today I had to come back and see all the Tiger talk. That was amazing this morning. I especially liked watching him celebrate the way he did.

Yeah it’s a one off and the stick probably has nothing to do with it either way, but I was just referencing Erik’s comment that pointed out the stick maybe helped him aim. On that putt it obviously didn’t. :)

Goldfinger ... because he's a cheater. (But not as good of a cheater as James Bond)😄

I have no angle here - but I did see Scott miss a 16-18" putt on Sunday with the flag in. (hole 5 I think??) I like this ... reminds me of the beginning of The Fugitive. 😉

Fun.

No. If I ride, it's in the cubby in the cart, and if I'm walking, it's in my bag with my keys and wallet. My pockets, while golfing, only have items pertinent to the round; ball marker, repair tool, chapstick in the left, tees in the right, glove in the back while putting.

I just read an article showing this information,and it goes even a step further. Not only do NFL teams winning the toss win just a hair over half of the time but look at the stat regarding my, and many other peoples, suggested solution of doing it like college does it: So if we are trying to lessen the affects of the coin toss, it seems like we should stick with the status quo. However, if we just forget that part, and just go for entertainment value and excitement, the college way definitely delivers that. Here's the article: Coin toss would remain important if OT rule is tweaked If the NFL tweaks its overtime rule, guaranteeing both teams a possession, the coin toss remains as important if not more important. As it stands now, the team winning the overtime coin toss has an obvious advantage. Score... Now I'm trying to imagine the buzz we'd be seeing this week on this topic if the Chiefs won the toss and drove down for a touchdown. I think it's fairly safe to say that there wouldn't be any. :)

Why stop at the refs, why not replace the players too? Remember this game: