LarryK

Of course, not. More than a few players on the Champion's Tour have shortened swings and have no trouble bombing it 290 and beyond. I've even noticed some PGA players who are normally parallel at the top off the tee shorten up on their mid and long irons if they want more control. You've found something that works and more (as in a LOT more) weekend hackers would do well to follow your lead.

Below my score for each hole I enter an "F" or "R" for fairway or rough. Unlike some others, I don't track the direction of my misses. Sounds like a good idea, though. Below the F or R I put the number of strokes it took to reach the green and then the number of putts to hole out. Thus, an F above a 2/2 on a par 4 indicates I hit the fairway, was on in regulation, and two-putted for a par (hey, sometimes it actually happens). From those three simple pieces of information (easily entered between holes), I've got fairway percentage, GIR, and putts per round. One other stat I have found helpful I simply call "other" I add 18 (the number of tee shots) to my total putts per round and subtract that number from my total score. That gives me that total strokes I have "wasted" between the tee and green. If you are a scratch golfer hitting 100% GIR, that number should be 18. For most of us, it will be considerably more. If I'm playing well, I'll get that number in the upper 20s to low 30s. Anything higher, and I'm in trouble. I also track penalty strokes. Nothing else paints as graphic a picture of the cost of not keeping the ball in play.

1. The Tour Championship is for the top 30 players period. No cut. In fact, even with his no-show, Philly Mick "earned" last place money. Not many tournaments offer that gimme. 2. Can't answer that one. Maybe someone else knows. 3. If a player is not within the top 125 on the money list, he hasn't earned "enough" money to "earn" his card. He may have other exemption status as a result of past tournament wins, but other than that he's SOL. I'm not certain what the policy would be if more than one guy in the 125 spot earned exactly the same amount of money for the year.

Now that's funny!

I could have posted this word-for-word for me. Use my 60 exactly the same way.

No, I actually understand the rationale for rolling it out of a divot, although as you say, it is clearly against the rules. What I DON'T understand are golfers who take a perfectly acceptable lie in the fairway and then feel compelled to roll it around "jest a little bit" to make it an absolutely PERFECT lie, sitting up as high as possible. ....like if they got lucky enough to hook up with J-Lo, they'd nag her to get a boob job.

FWIW, I could never understand people who improve lies in the fairway (divot lies notwithstanding). For the six or seven times a round that I actucally hit a fairway, my initial reaction is usually "How could it get any better than this?"

Erik: I have a handicap question that is a bit off topic for this thread, but your above quote makes it timely. One of my goals for 2006 is to finally (after eight seasons of playing golf) establish a USGA handicap. As I read all about how that process works (ESC; best 10 rounds out of 20; etc.), I basically assumed that every round I would play needs to count for handicap purposes. Your quote, however, brings that assumption into question. So....do you just decide before the round begins whether or not you are going to post? If good or bad things happen in mid-round, would you ever change your pre-round decision (doesn't seem kosher)? Would you routinely post or not post on a course you were playing for the first time? Just wondering what sort of considerations go into whether one posts or not. Thanks.

I absolutely understand the concept of self-policing that underlies the rules of golf, and I am familiar with the Stewart Cink quote. In fact, at the amateur and recreational level I embrace the concept whole heartedly. It is simply my belief that at the PROFESSIONAL level, this aspect of golf's tradition does not always serve us well. That we would be better served by PROFESSIONAL rules officials rendering informed rulings independent of any outside influence or inputs other than the competitors and perhaps their caddies within the ropes. My argument is not about what is, but what should be. I believe you and Cink are splitting the hair awfully thin in your analysis of the "difference" between golf and other pro sports. Stewie sez: "In other sports the officials guide the players..." You say: "All the [golf] rules officials do is advise players..." Sounds awfully similar to me. And then when you suggest that Wie's illegal drop would have been a-ok had it only been "sanctioned" by a rules official or her playing partner, I not only find myself in total agreement, but I am immediately reminded of a wise man who once said something like "holding isn't holding if a referee doesn't see it." Yeah, well, true enough! Officials may occasionally be wrong, but at least they are official . And how can you say that a golf rules official does not penalize a player when that official invokes a rule which assesses the player a 1 or 2 stroke penalty ? That's the word the rulebook uses, right? Do you really believe that is significantly different than a hockey referee enforcing a rule that prohibits tripping? You say: "In golf a rules violation is a rules violation" I say: "In ALL sports a rules violation is a rules violation and in ALL sports it is up to an umpire, referee, rules official, tournament committee or other official agency to enforce those rules by assessing penalties for their violation. But in golf, it would seem that even at the professional level, every Tom, Dick and Harry has a semi-legitimate role in the enforcement of those rules. Why is that a bad idea? Well, as some have suggested in this very forum, reporter Bamberger may have had less than pure motives in the manner and timing with which he brought this issue to light. I would like to believe that is not true, but what if I'm wrong? Would the integrity of the game be served by "rules snipers" intentionally waiting to reveal their knowledge of a rules violation until the moment when it would do their dispised player the most harm? Professional sports officials are hardly perfect, but I automatically have greater faith in their integrity and impartiality simply because they are....well, (supposedly at least) professional. So that's my position and I'm sticking to it. It's not based on any "lack of understanding" about golf's tradition, but rather a firm belief on how one aspect of the game -- professional competitions -- could be improved if we adopted a different procedure. Now at best, I would say this match was halved...........but as long as we're shaking hands on the 18th green....

I appreciate the 98% support, Muskie. I rarely get that kind of endorsement....but here's why you still owe me 2%. As you say, the line between fan "participation/interference" must be drawn somewhere. I say it should be that yellow polypropolene rope between us and the competitors. Pretend for a moment that you and I were standing by the SI reporter last Saturday as Michelle was taking her relief. You observe nothing amiss, but I start jumping up and down yelling "Egads, a transgression most foul". You: "Are you nuts?" Me: "No, she botched the drop!!" Several of your friends, who naturally agree with you, threaten to put a few more dimples in my balls. SI Reporter Bamberg: "Actually, I think he's right!" Me: "I swear by the grave of old Tom Morris, I shall not endure this. I'm going to fetch a rules official!" You: "Swell, moron. Bring me a beer and a brat on your way back!" Now the rest of the crowd is getting into it. Half says she did. The other half says she didn't. It starts to resemble a Miller Lite commercial ("Taste's Great! "Less Filling!"). Meanwhile, I find an official and pour out my story. Right or wrong I have at least "brought up the issue immediately" as you say. But in a world where apparently Annika Sorenstam doesn't understand the concept of line of sight relief and where Kevin Stadler doesn't know that a bent wedge is non-conforming and where Michelle Lee's equilateral triangles occasionally contain more than 180 degrees....in a world where it would appear that people who play this game for a living don't necessarily know the rules that well, WHY IN THE HELL SHOULD A RULES OFFICIAL (or anyone else) LISTEN TO MY INTERPRETATION OF THOSE SAME RULES!?!?!? If the rules of golf are as sacred and as important as so many say they are, then perhaps we need a few more TRAINED, PROFESSIONAL guardians of those rules rather than relying on a random fan base that may range from rabid to reasonable. It doesn't matter that a fan or sports writer might be correct in their call. What matters is that the game of golf (whose scores of "official interpretations" of the rules are as thick as the actual rule book itself) deserves, at least on the professional level, a more professional process of ajudication than informal consultations with faces in the crowd. If you and I tee it up on a weekend, we play it as it lies and correctly hold each other accountable to the rules as written and as best as we can interpret them. If we attend a professional golf tournament as spectators, we buy our tickets, leave the cell phones in the car and applaud enthusiastically whenever and wherever it is appropriate. And otherwise shut-the-hell-up.

Of all the goofy things concerning the rules of golf, this is one of the goofiest. In no other sport would a referee or game official give a rat's ass what some spectator, sports writer or concession stand cashier saw or thought they saw in the way of a rules violation. "Instant replaly" in most sports is fine. "Agonizingly delayed" replay makes a mockery of the integrity that is allegedly being protected. Most posters here have already made up their minds as to the motivations of the reporter. I'd like to think that perhaps part of his hesitancy was the realization that he was about to stick his nose into something that really was none of his business. If so, I wish he'd have followed that first inclination.

Which leads me to ask another question of all the rules experts here. If a ball has to leave its position in other to have "moved", why can't I simply hold it in place with one hand while I move loose impediments from around it?

Good for you (I guess). But did you really "move" the ball? According to Section II definitions in the USGA Rules of Golf, "A ball is deemed to have “moved’’ if it leaves its position and comes to rest in any other place." If the ball just jiggled and didn't leave its original position, I'd say you've got some strokes coming back to you (you didn't sign that scorecard yet, did you?) Speaking of rules, did anybody see Anika whining about line of sight relief from behind a scoreboard yesterday? I really don't know the rules all that well, but listening to the exchange, common sense told me the rules official was correct.

1. Not even close. 2. Not likely now. His best chance was yesterday. 3. Can't really think of a reason why he should. Monty seems like a really personable guy who is normally more charitable to us yanks then we often are to him. Doesn't deserve most of the crap he's been given, but as a golfer he is simply very, very, good. Flashes of brilliance don't get you into the HOF.

Given this picture, I actually understand where you're coming from. But you are still contemplating the wrong question. The indisputable fact is, she would look equally outstanding OUT of golf clothes and OUT of a bikini.

I agree that it is probably unfair to hold a 16-year-old to the media savy standards of adults. If anything, Michelle's performance in this category is probably average for someone of her age. Meanwhile, as Erik points out, Pressels and Creamer give exceptional interviews, which is just another facet of what makes them so amazing. Hopefully, Michelle's personality will blossom a bit in a few years. I just hope the sweet kid grows into an equally pleasant and admirable adult.

Well...yeah, but..... Not to pick on you in particular MG, but I believe we golfers in general tend to talk out of both sides of our "lateral hazards" on the issue of slow play and adherence to the rules. My guess is that the golfer who professes to be a stickler for the rules would be the first one to complain when the pace (at least in front of him) starts to bog down. And I don't care how conscientious the High Handicapper might be. You simply can't play a round of 104 with two sleeves of lost balls and a brisk military cadance ("left, right, left, right") as quickly as a round of 78 where the ball is kept in play. It's a difference of 26 strokes fer crissakes! That's six extra holes. Do we really want the hackers among us to invoke their R & A given right to dig for five minutes in seach of a 75-cent Top Flite only to trudge back to the tee for a reload? Not me. But rules are rules. There is a difference in slow play caused by ignorance and slow play caused by conspicuous lack of talent. I believe we should condemn the former and be as forgiving as possible toward the latter. Same with the rules. There is a huge difference between cheating and suspending certain rules in the interest of speeding up recreational, non-tournament play where no money is changing hands. If we can't tell the differences between the extremes in both cases, then we've lost all perspective. In the meantime, just remember: Unless you are playing Match Play, picking up your ball after nine or 10 strokes.........is against the rules.

Well, the fact that David Howell had to hit a 5-iron to cover 160 yards initially cheered me up, but then you had to ruin it by telling me he holed it for an eagle and he shot a 67. Now I'm depressed again.

Okay, but in your world, which hand is exerting the most force? Is the left hand pulling more than the right or vice versa? Are both hands pulling equally? Or are the hands essentially doing nothing and it's one big shoulder turn through and the hands and arms are just along for the ride? This discussion may help me with my grip pressure problem.

It's not just you. In addition to all the reasons you cited, how about this: How are American viewers going to identify with half of the competitors -- especially when their accents are sufficiently heavy as to require the producers to overlay subtitles on the bottom of the screen? I predict ratings for this series will be as dreary as the Scottish weather.

First, the good news: If you have only been playing a year and a half and are already shooting in the upper 80s and low 90s with all the swing problems you describe, you are doing TERRIFIC! As for your course management, your own words describe the problem. You attack the pin no matter what but often wind up in the bunker or rough....and yet you still want to "attack, attack, attack,". Are you by any chance related to Phil Mickelson? You dont want to buy what your friend tells you about shooting for the fat part of the green or laying up, but the next time you are standing in that bunker, ask yourself "Would I rather have this 30-foot bunker shot to the pin, or would I rather have had a 30-foot putt?" How you answer that question will tell you what shot you SHOULD have tried.

Agreed. The forearm test is a good one. I will focus back in on that for sure. But I'm also wondering if I'm not releasing the club funny. Maybe getting flippy or twisting my hands somehow so that they rub together in a damaging way. Blisters and callouses I could handle. But when the bone and cartilage of a joint start getting wear and tear, it is tough to keep them protected.

I use an overlapping grip. In so doing, the bottom side of the third finger of my right hand rests on the top side of the first finger of the left hand. Obviously. That's the nature of the overlapping grip. My problem is the the top knuckle of my right hand finger and the bottom knuckle of my left hand finger are being rubbed raw where my hands meet. I would not think this would be from excessive grip pressure. Pressure would seem to be applied by the inside of the fingers that actually make contact with the club. But I could be wrong. In any event, my hands hurt. Even with tape and cotton pads, I only get about one round of 18 in per weekend. I spend the rest of the week letting my knuckles heal. That ain't enough golf! Has anyone else ever had this problem or corrected it in a student? Thanks!

I voted frequently because my partners and I give each other "grief" frequently, but the spirit of our play is the same as that voiced by Muskegman. There is a fine line between strategy, gamesmanship and poor sportsmanship. Conceding or not conceding putts in match play is what I would term strategy. If exercising my perogatives within the rules disrupts my opponent, so be it. However, making comments about the course or an opponents style of play that are intended to disrupt him mentally is gamesmanship and is tacky at best. I would tend not to do that even if it was within the rules. Jingling coins in your pocket as your opponent begins his downswing is poor sportsmanship of the worst sort. Such cretins have no place in a gentleman's game.

Caddied a bit for my dad growing up, but basically thought golf was about the dumbest game going. Got hooked about 7 years ago in my late forties and now wonder how I might have swung when I was flexible. Hangin' in there, however. Shot my personal best of 83 this summer. And then did it twice more over the next few months. Plan on establishing my first handicap next season.