France46

Quote: Originally Posted by giantbear You sure this was about golf?? I wasn't there but a friend claims to have told the bride to keep her head down and follow through as part of his best man wedding toast.

Seems like the grain/break argument is largely one of semantics. If and Speed affects break (by giving gravity more or less time to act) then Grain (indirectly) affects break. Can everyone live with that?

That was my original thinking when looking at the formula, but the more I thought about it, the more I am thinking that a neutral slope adjustment of 113 does not necessarily mean a course is of "average" difficulty. Put another way, a course of "average" difficulty may be one that a scratch can shoot the course rating half the time, but that higher handicap golfers will not shoot the rating plus differential half the time. I can only think of a couple of instances where I have played courses with slopes LESS THAN 113, but many instances where I have played courses with HIGHER slopes. So if by "average" difficulty we mean a course that is harder than 50% and easier than 50% of all the courses out there, maybe it is something higher than 113- maybe something around 120 with a rating of 71??

While it sounds like A could have handled it better, 5 can be a tough number to divide up. We ended up with 5 at a friends wedding when the brides father joined us- very nice guy and we made it work with the groom moving from one pair to the other, but it was a bit more awkward and would have been better had we had 4 or 6.

Generally speaking, I find most course ratings/slopes make sense, but there are certainly exceptions. As noted, conditions can change week to week or even day to day and/or time of day you play. It would be more work and there are always going to be flaws with the handicap system, but I think it would be that hard for the golf associations to attempt to look for biases in course ratings by doing some cross comparisons using computer data bases.

I think he means contact not shot, at least that is how I interpreted it but I have a good bit of experience dealing with people not speaking/typing in their native tongue.

It is easy to play Monday morning QB, but Phil has been the 2nd best player in the World over the last 20 years, so it seems like he must be doing something right. Hard to believe that he has so much more talent than everyone else that he can consistently make dumb decisions and still find a way to win 41 PGA events and 71 million US dollars. There are guys with better swings than Phil and he is not as good a putter as Tiger. In fact, he has had 4 seasons with a negative strokes gained putting (meaning he was below tour average putting those years). Maybe he plays a bit smarter than people think??

Sounds like a lot of fun...nice that you have good options so close to home!

Thanks for sharing. Like your signature also!

^^This and/or maybe you play quicker and think less about it when you are playing through??

To the OP, did you get a trip booked? If not, assuming you don't mind Aussies, there are some wonderful courses in the Melbourne/Victoria "sand belt" region.

Do players who missed the cut get a check? I didn't think so, but I see this in the Euro Tour site- http://www.europeantour.com/europeantour/season=2013/tournamentid=2013044/leaderboard/index.html http://www.europeantour.com/europeantour/players/playerid=1768/ Tournament End Date Pos Prize Money R1 R2 R3 R4 Total Par U.S. OPEN CHAMPIONSHIP 16/06/2013 T74 € 1,529.72 74 75 149 +9 Looks like it counts for the Order of Merit but not PGA Tour official money

thumbs up for making fun of yourself! What does everyone think the winning score would have been had the course be hard and fast? Having played a very wet, short and hilly course over the weekend, it was no bargain. I know firm greens/fairways are harder to hold, but having to play out of a downhill embedded lie in the rough and losing a ball you hit towards the middle of the fairway is not good for scoring either (and that was only the first two holes). The most tired I have been after a round in a long time.

True...and the guy knew how to win when his game was on- 25 PGA Tour wins out of 105 top 10s and 51 top 3s is a good ratio. As a comparison Rose has 5 wins, 49 top 10s and 17 top 3s. His last win was probably the most impressive having only played in 7 events the 4 previous years.

Wanted to throw you a bone in your shooting par thread but noticed it was closed. I agree with you that 17 putts per 9 is above average for a beginner. As the others said, this would not be a good for a pro (or even single digit player) who missed a lot of greens, but most of the beginners (and some of the veterans) I have ever played with average more than 2 putts per hole. The norm for bad golfers is to chip/pitch outside of 15 feet and then 2 putt or worse. You have a long way to go to get to a single digit hc let alone shooting par for 18 on a decent course, but your putting may actually be one of the better parts of your game currently. While I think you have received your fair share of bashing already, I think a thread speculating on the title to your book would be at least as funny as the Sergio note to Tiger thread. Hang in there!

Congrats Chilli Dipper! You remind me of some of the guys I have caddied with over the years who have an excellent way of explaining why a particular horse won the race as well as the reason they bet on another horse..

I carry a driver, 13.5 three metal, 19 hybrid, 4-PW, 52, 56 & 60. While I might have some gaps with the longer clubs, I don't think it is that significant as it is hard to be perfectly accurate with them a lot of the time. For bunkers, I use both my 56 which has 14° bounce and my 60 which has 7° depending on the length of shot and consistency of the sand. For you, 52 & 58 may be a good way to go but I would give consideration to having at least one with a decent amount of bounce.

Some pretty rough front 9s by the 3rd round leaders so far- Phil- 2 doubles Horschel- 4 bogies Stricker- an 8 and two bogies shooting 41 Charl and Luke Donald- 42 each Makes the 35s by Rose and Day look all the more impressive as well as Dufner's 67 with a triple.

What if you are not sure when the pitch mark was made? i.e. a guy in your group hits a shot that lands in the neighborhood of your ball but there are several pitch marks in the same general area (possibly one from your ball and one from his, but you are not sure which is which)

To the OP, Lee Trevino played a push fade and simply aimed way left to adjust. For most of us this will not result in the longest shot, but it worked for him. If you are really consistent and happy with your distance, you could give it a try. So what would be the shot shape if you swung out to in (left of your target) with an open club face (right of target) assuming center contact- seems like it would be a push with an even bigger slice.

What you originally wrote is close, but not 100% accurate in all cases as you have to factor in SLOPE in most handicap systems. You would be correct if the slope was exactly 113 but the differential goes down as the slope goes up (and vice versa) Roughly, if you shot an ESC adjusted 81 with a course rating of 71, your differential would be about 9 if the slope was 124 and about 11 if the slope was 102. From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handicap_(golf) For each officially posted round, the player's handicap differential is calculated according to the following formula: ESC score is the equitable score control adjustment, which allows for a maximum number of strokes per hole, for handicap computation purposes only, based on the player's course handicap. The differential is rounded to the nearest tenth. Number of rounds Differentials to use 5 or 6 lowest 1 7 or 8 lowest 2 9 or 10 lowest 3 11 or 12 lowest 4 13 or 14 lowest 5 15 or 16 lowest 6 17 lowest 7 18 lowest 8 19 lowest 9 The handicap index is then calculated using the average of the best 10 differentials of the player's past 20 total rounds, multiplied by 0.96.

I am sure feels do vary and I am not disputing the ball flight laws. I also agree that instructors (or those looking to self diagnose their swings/shots) should definitely know the ball flight laws. In terms of ACTUAL information, what % of Tour players who hit a push draw set up with their club face open, closed and square to their target?

I am going to say that part of the reason that guy is not on tour is NOT lack of ability, but lack of self confidence. The guys on tour, particularly the winners, believe in themselves even when they aren't playing well. Have you ever seen Tiger interviewed after a poor round and seen him say that he is not far away or when he was all over the course and said that he mostly hit the ball well except for a shot or two. Yes, the pros are tremendously talented, and most of us might not be even close, but my guess is that the difference between the guy you saw shoot 63 and a Jim Furyk or Zach Johnson is mental, not physical. JF and ZJ believed they belonged on tour and put in the hard work until it happened. Believing in yourself is no guarantee that you will make it but a lack of believe seems like a guarantee you will be right.

I don't mind that the course may be soft...sure, hard and fast seems to be a US Open tradition, but Champions should be able to score the best in whatever mother nature provides. Some great stories out of the qualifiers including 54 yo Jay Don Blake being the only player to be playing in both the US Open and the SR US Open. 23 yo Zach Fischer beating pro Ryan Palmer in a 12 hole playoff for the final guaranteed spot out of Dallas, 18 yo Gavin Hall birdieing his last 4 holes and 19 yo Grayson Murray playing his last 6 holes -5 to get in are also impressive. I wonder what went through the mind of 46 yo US Open rookie John Nieporte, whose dad played in a dozen US Opens, after he made a hole in one on his 30th hole and then beat 15 yo David Snyder in a playoff to earn his spot. Looking at the field, there are definitely some guys past their prime like Michael Campbell, JM Olazabal and Mike Weir. The last two got in via qualifiers which means their game may be on the upswing, but I don't expect much from them. There are also some guys having pretty good years who will be watching from the sidelines including 11 Howell III, Charles 13 English, Harris 20 Walker, Jimmy 23 Kirk, Chris 26 Gay, Brian 27 Merrick, John

I am not sure who was advocating setting up with the clubface LEFT/Closed to the target when you want to return it RIGHT/Open to target- at least with Leadbetter, the OP said SQUARE TO THE TARGET at address. I am guessing that there are a lot of stupid monkeys on tour who hit both draws and fades setting up with the club square to the target because this is what works for them. If you asked them if it felt like they were returning the club to impact slightly open for push draws many might say that is NOT how it "feels" to them even if that is what they are doing. Just like your body swings outward when you know you are open, maybe some players have a tendency to square the club when they know they set up with it open and/or tend to square the club to the body when they swing (thus leaving it a bit right/open when they are set up right/closed). Seems to me, one of the worst shots you can hit is the double cross- a push fade instead of a push draw seems way less desirable than a straight draw . I am sure I have the numbers wrong, but say you are trying to swing out 4° and start with the club 2° open to the target/closed to the path. If you let the club open 3° you have a push fade instead of your desired push draw. OTOH, if you start square and let it open 3° you still hit a push draw. True, closing it 3° starting from square will be a bigger pull hook than starting from 2° right/open but both are likely better than a double cross. However, I used to hit a draw from an open stance, open club and think you are less likely to feel like you need to close the club when you start with it square than when you start with it open/right of target (even if that is where you want to return it).