Big C

It's pretty close. The odds of a 50/50 shot going your way 21 times are greater than 1 in a million! I guess your point is, that simple fact is not enough to declare these guys dirty rotten sandbaggers. I disagree, but fair enough. I posted it here on the message board to get different perspectives, after all. I probably won't be digging further into specific scores. I have no dog in this fight beyond a generalized contempt for sandbagging. With that said, it would not surprise if a lot of clubs shared my concern and were grousing about it to the SCGA.

That is true but, theoretically wouldn't that be factored into the Playing Conditions Calculation that was recently added to the handicapping system?

I don't know about that. Put another way, if a guy beat you 21 straight times in a handicapped match, would you think his handicap was legit? Or would you call him a cheating sandbagger?

No, I did not dig into individual scores. But it seems to me the odds of a team winning 21 straight matches in a fairly handicapped competition are quite remote. Maybe not exactly like flipping heads 21 times in a row on a coin but close. To my mind, those odds go beyond explanations such as good play or even good fortune. Do you think I am off base?

A bit of background. The Southern California Golf Association (SCGA) runs an annual event known as "Team Play." It is a wildly popular match play competition where Men's Clubs across the region put together teams of 20+ golfers together to compete against other clubs in a 16 vs. 16 match. In any given year, approximately 80-100 clubs will participate. Each club is grouped into "pods" of 4, and will play 6 total matches - one home and one away match against the other 3 clubs. The winning club from each pod advances to the Team Play Playoffs - a single elimination format - until a winner is crowned. Antelope Valley Country Club just advanced to the championship match for the 3rd consecutive year. They won the championship in both 2022 and 2023. Based on my review of the match history from the past 3 years (linked below), they have won 21 consecutive team matches. Keep in mind, these are handicapped matches, so this is not just a case where a group of sticks bands together to dominate the poor amateurs other SoCal clubs. Even if these guys are grinders who never quit, play their best under pressure and routinely putt the lights out, the law of averages still say that a streak of that nature is mathematically impossible. Is there any plausible explanation beyond institutionalized sandbagging throughout the club? Team Play Page

Most clubs that implement preferred lies also require that the type of lie remain the same. I.E. you cannot move the ball from rough to fairway. Does your league require the same?

Their recent podcast recapped a 2 day NC Amateur event that Mike participated in this February. Playing off a 6 handicap, he shot a 97 and a 102. Kudos to him for facing up to it with a positive attitude. If I had posted similar scores in year 7 of my quest, I would probably just shut the entire project down.

You might be on to something here…

Generally speaking, extended warranties are a terrible deal and should almost always be avoided. They are a huge profit center for the companies that offer them, which should tell you almost everything you need to know about how much value most consumers get when purchasing them. This is correct, and the old adage applies - only buy insurance when you can't afford the loss. This usually doesn't apply to most consumer goods. To your second question, no I don't believe the offer is fair. They are replacing it, but it is not being replaced at "no cost to you". Since the amount being disputed (over $500) is non-trivial, I would probably push the issue. Don't waste your time on the phone with a customer service agent or a supervisor. They have probably given you all they have the authority to do. Rather, I would look at the terms of your agreement and specifically legal disputes. The odds are you probably agreed to binding arbitration in the event of a dispute. The agreement will outline what steps need to be followed, but it will probably look something like this. 1. Mail the Nordic Track legal department outlining your dispute and indicate you are not satisfied with the resolution offered. 2. Open up a case with the AAA (American Arbitration Association), along with the required documentation. 3. Wait about 4-5 weeks for a case to be opened - at which point someone from Nordic Track's legal department will offer to give you the new model at no cost to you. They certainly don't want to spend the time and energy to fight you over $500. 4. Enjoy your new Nordic Track at no cost to you. I recently entered binding arbitration against a fairly large and well known company that screwed me over and refused to make it right. In my demand letter, I made a pretty sizeable request that included compensation for my time and frustration. Once it hit their legal department, they cut me a check - no questions asked. It was far cheaper to settle with me than to send their legal team to defend them in the arbitration.

Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I found this advice from Phil Mickelson to be some of the worst that I have ever seen posted online. I played two rounds last week and every single time I thought about keeping my "hand speed" up on my chips and pitches, the results were downright disastrous. I laid so much sod over my short game shots that I'm pretty sure the greenskeeper needed to put in overtime this weekend. Bottom line, I understand that different thoughts resonate differently with different people, but it's hard for me to see how getting fast with your hands can ever be considered worthwhile advice. Thoughts? Phil Mickelson Hand Speed Video

Funny. I saw this article and was going to post the same thing. If they continue to take a firm stance with this (and enforce it with the big names as well), then I'll have to tip my cap to them on that front.

Another interesting thought experiment: At one point on the handicap axis would your vote shift to saying the low capper would never lose? For instance, I would feel fairly confident that a +6 (basically a tour pro) would never lose to a 7 handicapper, no matter how many times they played over a 30 year run. But what about a scratch golfer vs. a 13? or a +2 vs. an 11? At some point, the better player becomes so good that their "bad" rounds are still good enough to take care of business 99.9% of the time, given the skill difference.

It would be helpful to know how often they played together. Weekly? Monthly? Few times a year? My first instinct was to say a 16 would never beat a 3. But my 19 handicap dad has bested me on a few nines and come dangerously close to beating me over a full 18 (although I don’t believe he’s ever actually done it). For context we’ve been playing 10-12 times a year for the last 15 years or so. If the 16 and 3 play anything more than monthly than I think the high capper takes him down at some point.

Really mediocre golf year for me - aside from one “lifetime” round in late May, I was basically a 7-8 index posing as a 5-6. I wish I could say that I see it improving in 2024, but with my work travel resumed and kids sports and activities occupying an increasing share of my time, my rounds are going to be limited in the near term. With that being said, I am going to do better at finding pockets of time to hit the range, and be exceedingly intentional with every swing, practice or otherwise.

Recent update: He's got a bit of a Scheffler spin-out going on with the front foot. He can generate pretty good power for his size, but consistency is a struggle. BTW - Merry Christmas to all on this forum!

That may be true. Perhaps the partnership was the best of several bad options they had available to them. But it's easy to see how it could make it easier for the big name players to say "screw it" and take the money.

I'm actually surprised it took this long for the next domino to fall. The minute the Tour announced it was entering into a partnership with the PIF, it's basically a tacit admission that all their grandstanding about ethics and "doing the right" thing was just a facade. I'm sad to see the news, but I don't begrudge Rahm. He's going to earn 10x his lifetime salary in 3 years. And he probably figured that since he's going to be in business with the PIF - either directly or indirectly - why not take the massive payday while it's there.

I suspect you are correct. At the courses here in Southern California, it’s very common to see the tees moved forward on several holes. If I were to play 10 rounds at a random sampling of courses, my guess is that the back tee markers would be “correct” (say, within 25-30 yards of the course yardage) on two of them. Often the difference is well over 100 yards. I adjust within reason, but there are times when I don’t. For example, if the difference between blues and the next set down is substantial and I think the score is unlikely to count towards my 8, I’ll probably just post it as a blue tee score. This shaves a few off my “anti-cap” and probably affects the data above as well. My hunch is that most golfers don’t adjust at all.

Always: When golfing with a client or customer and you are sharing a cart. Nothing wins you more brownie points than being able to tell a good client "I've found you right here!" And regardless of whether the ball is even remotely findable, they always appreciate the effort. Never: If we are playing in a best ball scenario, my ball is in good shape and we are falling behind pace with the group in front of us. In that case, I'll always go directly to my ball and hit my second shot. If I hit a good one, I'll tell my partner he can call off the search in the interests of time. Fake it: If I'm playing with a competitor who is known to be loose with the rules. I want to be in the general vicinity to make sure there is no funny business going on, but I really have no interest in helping him find his ball.

Reflecting back, almost all of my best/lowest scoring rounds have come when walking vs. riding. I think that is easier for me to stay in the moment, and keep a "one shot at a time" mentality when I am forced to take a little extra time getting to my ball.

JT was a borderline call based on current form, but far more defensible when you look at the totality of his team-play resume. Not many Americans have a record as impressive as JT's. Would you rather throw in a first timer like Glover or Young into a pressure packed match on European soil? Or a guy with the track record below? He's 16-5-3 in Presidents Cups and Ryder Cups combined, and 6-2-1 in just Ryder Cups. Thomas is on a path to be the best team match-play golfer in U.S. history, and this is the single most salient, repeatable, and critical fact in this entire debate.

For tour pros, I would suspect there is almost no advantage to having the flag stick in. The benefit comes when putts are moving to the hole at a relatively high rate of speed. Generally that occurs when the putt is very long (very difficult to gauge the speed), or the putter themselves has poor distance control. That often applies to amateurs, but usually does not apply to tour pros. Anecdotally, I have seen a handful of dead center putts that rattle the flag and kick out, so there are times when leaving the flag stick in is a disadvantage. With the benefits being negligible to the pros, it comes down to a personal preference, and I suspect most pros like the visual look of an open hole from mid to short range.

I agree that taking practice swings/putts can often lead to confusion, so I generally save those until it's my turn. With that said, I try to do all of the following while others are hitting. Laser my distance. Make necessary accommodations for wind/elevation/trouble. Pick my club. Stand behind my ball and visualize my desired start line and ball flight. Then when it's my turn, I can just step up to the ball, take a few practice swings and the ball is in the air in less than 20 seconds.

Bryson can be annoying, but the sport of golf is more interesting when he is playing well. Glad to see him regain his form and especially now that he is working with Dana Dahlquist. Dana teaches out of my home course in Long Beach, and is a good guy and a solid instructor. It's great to see Bryson have success under his coaching.

Agree with this. I think the OP missed the mark on this one. To call a voluntary donation "cheap" because it doesn't represent a large enough portion of his income (who gets to decide that, by the way?) is bad form.