dhockey11

If there were three groupings waiting at the tees at multiple locations, why was only this one group considered out of position? I actually like the ruling and hope the kid learns from this, but if what I am reading is correct, it seems a little unusual only one player was penalized, not to mention this one player everyone is watching but doesn't expect to win. Seems a little strategic for me.

In my last round, I hit a shot that just rolled back off the green into the water. I walked around the hazard to where my ball fell in, determined it was unplayable, and went back to hit my approach shot again. I couldn't tell you if I was within 6ft of where my previous shot had been, but I played it to my best guess, and moved on. It was close enough to be as the rules intended. Since no one but Tiger even realized that he was 2 yards behind his last spot, I think it was close enough to be "as intended". Since we are debating how the rules are intended to be interpreted to determine whether or not Tiger should be DQ'd, he clearly should not be.

Why should a player who cannot remember where they last shot from be given more room for error than someone who is more aware/observant? I think that Tiger's 2 yard calculation is not a DQable offense simply because the rule is written poorly. This can't be the first time this has been debated (although no other time was probably as important), and the rules committee should clearly have changed it before this. "Nearly as possible" is not an acceptable description if the rounds are to be scrutinized as much as they are these days. Also, all the broadcasting companies would rage if Tiger was DQs. Not going to happen, nor do I think it should.

I'm not a great golfer, but I started playing the Gamer V2 to hopefully get a consistent feel and result with my awful short game. I've been impressed so far by the feel around the greens, but pleasantly surprised by the gain in distance. I had been playing the DT Solo and ive gained at least 10 yards with every club usibg the Gamer. Not sure if it is just my swing improving or not, but I am very pleased with my new golf ball.

I have the G15 pw and uw. Assuming the G5s have a similar sole, I would definitely recommend a different SW. I would replace the SW and get two new wedges, 54* and 58* (or whatever gives you good full shot gaps). Find out which loft you prefer for sand shots and you'll have a very versatile set. I have Taylornade ATVs and would reccomend those, but im sure any brand woild be similar.

Bill Haas -12 Henrik Stenson -13 Thorbjorn Oleson -13

Process Engineer at a chemical fertilizer manufacturing plant. The mathematical approach to the golf swing lured me into joining this site... :-P

I have the 54 and 58 atv. Got them both for $110 used on ebay in great condition and I couldn't be happier. Before I purchased I found a great thread, on this site I believe, where TM sent wedges to users for review. The reviews were very positive so I bought a pair and haven't looked back. I haven't used the competitors products since I am new to the game and these are my first high dollar wedges, but they do work as advertised: the sole is versatile, has enough bounce for sand or anything else you want to do.