rehmwa

My power point fu is strong in child like pictures My sand game is good if I practice, sucks otherwise. But in scrambles I've been in the same boat. Usually a better lie.

I agree except the hosel getting farther part- you're much closer. Though much less likely for hosel contact to send the ball to the right (that why I'd agree with it being a toe or bladed contact, not hosel)

well.....there you go. Rickie's in

If it was Phil, the announcers would be swooning over his "imagination" used in his shots....

Sad part is he's also likely to be the asshole in the BMW that's doing stupid shit every morning on the way to work. HOWEVER, I'd be happy to see him in the group in front of me on the course too..... (My apologies to those whose clubs have a lot of BMWs and Audi's in the parking lot. Not for the comment, just for your club)

clearly he wouldn't have had time for a beer......maybe toss a shot down as he's running past your table....

results was fine - therefore he didn't do anything wrong hard shot to repeat though even with a lot of practice, I'd switch to something more standard obviously it's a toe strike - video evidence is irrefutable......😛

I don't think anyone will argue that those are 6 (😛) really powderpuff schools and would be a great lineup if one just wanted to guarantee a bowl game...... Big 10 does have a disproportionate number of powderpuffs in the conference, but their good teams are decent enough a test. unfortunately they don't play everyone in the conference and this year's draw wasn't very flattering. I'd posit this is typical of the other 3 power conferences though, just more exagerated. Part of a big winning records is winning the easy ones along with winning against better teams. But I can't reject them because of that (history aside) - I can only conclude that there isn't any data to be certain. We'll find out in the semi's one way or the other (I think this year is different and they get to the finals......). I can only say that they are a very good team that will have to work hard as I don't think they are being prepared as much as could be or as much as the others.

OK - now with the freak previously undefeated teams (MN and Baylor) (I hate Baylor) with a loss. The rankings look a lot better to those of us that look at it """SHALLOWLY"""...

I agree with you. Tiger is sentimental about WINNING. He'll pick accordingly, and likely that's why he has Rickie next on the list. The fact of friendship doesn't play except in considerations of team chemistry. They stay friends regardless.

My read on the article was it's a bit tongue in cheek....

in the interview he said Ricky was the next one out after his 4 picks....

I started watching that one as it was a headliner - but I can't stand Dick Vitale. So I had to switch it off. I didn't want to take a chance of accidently un-muting and hearing his voice.

The Fooball thread is busy. But basketball season is starting. Is it too early to open a thread? - all the teams are working through their pre-season cupcakes and padding the stats....... Except Kansas - hahahahahahahahahaha! No padding that win loss record so far... (with that many turnovers, though, and still staying close, could Duke be on the decline even with a win?) Speak up if you will.

It is when i go off on the tangents - (I'll sit back and learn) thanks

Always a fan of this one. I think it would also do much to drive up the quality of the 2nd tier conferences - with the visibility and opportunity here, good talent would have a more legit reason to consider other conferences than just ACC/SEC/B12/B10 I hate Baylor

I was talking about how I think one should address it when they see a penalty (shoulds and best case type of approach in terms of relating to your playing partners). But I thought this thread was in the general topics, not the Rules of Golf forum explicitly. My bad, I thought about that the other day and just now came to check... We try to keep the threads in this specific forum about the rules directly, rather than hypotheticals or how we think things should be handled. As such, and noted already, I have no issues as to the rules compliance. Kim observed, notified per the rules. the other two took their penalties directly once notified/updated. Everyone did what's required. all the rest is digression - including tweets, or opinions. My bad. I'll step out unless it's moved to another forum for that kind of thing. Good discussions all around regardless

that's two very reasonable reasons that could give Kim the benefit of the doubt for waiting so long - thanks (the other being she wasn't certain if the new rule changes had affected this one)

She didn't break any rules. She did what she needed to do to get clear of the mess. I'm fine with that, but if it's a real courtesy game, the 'shoulds' of the rule should mean more. Courtesy - she delayed from PROMPTLY to 10 holes later - I'll disagree with you. I doubt she'd want the same if roles were reversed. Decisiveness - she decisively passed the buck. and then when the official was too cowardly to act promptly and 'kicked it upstairs'. Her hands were washed - I'll agree agree with you. Spirit of the game - people call penalties on themselves - if you see something, you tell them directly and let them have the chance to do the right thing. You don't hide behind the official - especially when he's screwing it up too. I'll disagree - frank and open with your playing partners is part of the spirit. Perhaps if they are more willing to point out these things, then respect for the rules of golf wouldn't be such a scary chore... Good chat - I see your points. I have my own. that's rude from someone who didn't even read my first post before commenting on a straw man. and we were doing so well up to then. absolutely none of my arguments are in this vein. I suggest you find whoever is putting these forth and not lump me in with those people.

1 - sounds good - that one's easy 2 - "Kim waited until the end of the round (10 holes later) to tell the pair that they had violated Rule 10-2. " That's not promptly. that's the whole point The rule says promptly then it says "and certainly before the player returns his or her scorecard" - I read that as it's the longest delay suggested if you can't do it promptly. I agree she met the rules. But I bet if she unknowingly broke a rule and there were 10 holes left - she'd want to know immediately, not half a round later. Rules followed? no issues. Courtesty, decisiveness and spirit of the game - not so much

thanks, found it: 1 - that rule has nothing to do with my complaint that the rules official didn't know the rule and had to send it in for comment. Rules officials should know the rule. He says "yes, that's a violation", and he reminds the players affected about it. then it's in their court if it becomes an "issue" or not. They argue? then he pulls in the committee. But that scenario can play out between players even without the official. 2 - Neither the player nor the official TOLD THE OFFENDERs (immediately - revised for those that can't follow). If told, they might have recalled the rule and just taken the penalty. That's not an 'agreement' that's a player taking a penalty as is her responsibility. She freaking waited 10 holes, so did the official. It's not rocket science - give the offender the opportunity to take the penalty ("Hey, I don't think you can ask that. It's a penalty"). If they acknowledge it and take the strokes, end of discussion - it's not an 'issue', it's not a problem. If they disagree or ignore - then you report it. IF they'd spoken up then here's some "issues" that would require elevation: 1 - ignoring it completely 2 - arguing that it's not a penalty 3 - arguing it's only 1 stroke vs two 4 - admitting they don't know, and wanting to be sure If they take the information (which is encouraged under the rules), recall the rule, and take the appropriate penalty, it's not an issue. It's just honest scorekeeping. - if you hit a ball out of bounds in front of me, I don't call a rules official unless you forget to take your strokes. you just take them and keep playing. If I note the penalty for hitting out of bounds, that's not an agreement. Kim did the right thing but in a scared way IMO. She knew the rule (saying she was uncertain is bull, it's not a complex rule. If people want to bury Dye for not knowing it, how can they give a pass for Kim "kinda" knowing the rule?) and still couldn't speak up in a timely manner for any number of reasons - I suspect she wanted to avoid any conflict. ok, fine. She did the next best thing and brought it up immediately to an official - let him play 'bad cop'. But The official doesn't get any slack. If Kim was too scared to informed the others, the official has zero reason to not speak up right then and there and let them have the opportunity to do the correct thing immediately. c. Rules Issues in Stroke Play No Right to Decide Rules Issues by Agreement. If a referee or the Committee is not available in a reasonable time to help with a Rules issue you have no right to decide a Rules issue by agreement and any such agreement you may reach is not binding on any player, a referee or the Committee. You should raise any Rules issues with the Committee before returning your scorecard. You Should Protect Other Players in the Competition. If you know or believe that another player has breached the Rules and does not recognize or is ignoring this, you should tell that player, the player’s marker, a referee or the Committee. You should do this promptly, and certainly before the player returns his or her scorecard. Your failure to do so could be serious misconduct resulting in disqualification.

So a rules official 'took a while' to answer the question on asking a caddie what club is someone hitting....... If a rules official can't answer that specific item immediately....I'm not surprised that players won't disposition their own observations and penalties on their own with confidence...... That the official had to send it in, and then it took forever to get an answer, stands out even more than anything to me.....

I'm not tracking her - is the blowback because she notified of the penalty? That's not fair - she should speak up and has a duty to, not just for the two involved, but for the whole field. if the blow back is because she waited? I get that. They started on 10. the thick plottens 😛

Horribly written article - unless you know the players, you have to draw a freaking diagram to understand the paragraph: Simplified. Player 3 asked Player 2's caddie what club she was hitting. The caddie answered. Player 1 didn't turn them in until the end of the round. Everyone involved thought it was innocent ignorance. Player 2's caddie ID'd and pulled the wrong club, both players involved messed up the hole. Everybody feels bad. Neither woman made it to the LPGA this time. 1 - Player 3 - Know the rules 2 - Player 2's caddie - pull the right club.....and know the rules 3 - Player 1, who the hell are you to decide to wait to notify a penalty??!! 4 - How does it take an hour for a 'committee' to deliver the confirm on the penalty? This is pretty simple and if the players penalize themselves correctly, the 'committe' isn't even a factor. For that matter - how does a committee "give" a penalty? Players take their own penalties. At most, the committed would inform the player and then the player scores themselves accordingly. Simple - Player 3 and Player 2's caddie screw up. Player 1 immediately notifies them. They both take their penalties on the score card. Move on to the next hole. That's it. No freaking Committee needed, unless they try to fight it. Player 2 I feel bad the most for. Not only did she get the penalty, but the caddie handed her the wrong club on that shot I agree - stupid rule - you can peek at their bag, but not actually discuss golf while golfing. I wonder the reasoning of how it originated. I could see that asking and discussion golf shot selection is just plain annoying and distracting and could be abused by "that guy" that thinks he plays head games.... But, rules are the rules....

I used to think that - and that it's a 'purity' thing. But no - I was eventually forced to admit that it was a beginner thing. I was confusing the need for water to take down a harsh bite from cheap stuff. But for good stuff, that's just wrong - they aren't harsh, so it's all about the experience. The better the scotch, the more variety you get from contrasting adding water vs drinking neat can create very distinct flavors and nose and everything. Some of them are so complex that the amount of water has definite impacts on the experience. Golf forum - think of it as going to a top notch golf course and playing from different tees to experience the course in totally different ways..... You don't always force the tips just because. For anyone that wants to try, I've found a couple (some from Ardbeg are great examples and their website actually walks you through it) of the very peaty/smokey types where you can play around all day with constrasting neat vs water, etc from a single bottle and it's like a tasting from a half dozen bottles.....the water determines which of the flavors get emphasized. It was an eye opener. I'd say that if you save up for the good stuff, then the water is important to understand. If you just want to hammer it straight, get the cheap stuff as it doesn't matter other than to bring down the harshness....