Jump to content

Pretzel

Moderator
  • Content Count

    3,226
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    18

Everything posted by Pretzel

  1. Testing, either in sufficient or terribly inadequate numbers, combined with strong intervention policies that heavily restrict people who have known exposure to the virus. If you have enough tests you can trace cases early on and attempt to strangle the infection before it can take root on a wider scale. If you don't test much then it's impossible to report new cases because you never know they happened. Either way testing doesn't mean anything unless you are able to isolate everyone who has been exposed for 14 days without them returning to public. Expecting people to self-quarantine without any consequences for failure to do so is like expecting a toddler to stay out of the cookie jar when you don't punish them for sneaking cookies in the first place - individuals with strong morals won't have any issues complying but many others will fail to do so deliberately or by accident. It also helps that 64% of the population is rural, compared to only 23% of the US population. It means most people are social distancing whether they intend to or not, and eases the burden of testing for confirmed cases/tracking exposure to confirmed cases because there are fewer areas and fewer people in which the virus can rapidly spread.
  2. Bryson must be a silicon-based lifeform. Cold, calculating, and now feeding off the computers and data to grow stronger. He honestly looks like a teenager who suddenly hit puberty while working on a farm. Went from a beanpole to beefy in six months or less, and the scenario I described is the only other place I've seen such dramatic transformations occur. It's funny to picture Bryson out in a field stacking bales into the haywagon either way.
  3. When the club posts the scores, do they post them with the correct date in the past or do they post them with the current date? Posting usually gives you the options of choosing the date the round was played, and so long as the date of the round is correctly selected it should not affect PCC modifications. It will certainly delay any PCC modifications since the data needed to make a modification is missing for several days, but from what I've seen it seems the PCC may take several days to appear anyways because of delayed score posting from individuals that always happens regardless. If asking a question to GHIN, it would probably be best to ask how many times/how often is PCC for a given date updated. If it updates only once at the end of the day then the PCC for your tournaments would not take into account performance during the tournament and only performance from players before/after the tournament group. If it updates several times up to a week after the date, which would make the most sense because many golfers don't post the same day they play already, then the PCC would still be eventually corrected based on your tournament scores.
  4. I was a little surprised myself, but it appears as though the prongs are separate pieces to the base they attach into. Instead of just casting it all as a single piece they cast it as 4 separate pieces (3 prongs and 1 center hub). The part that failed was the bond holding one of the prongs to the center hub.
  5. Just as an update to my earlier review, my Fusion 2.5 finally broke today after nearly 2.5 years of hard use. One of the side prongs fell out. That said, it lasted quite some time and I did like it enough that I'll probably be buying another one soon enough. It really does work better for getting your mark ironed out flat.
  6. My experience with the pro is off to a great start so far - only 3 of the 14 tags seemed to have arrived with enough battery charge to pair with the app and update the firmware. Another 4 had enough battery charge to pair, but less than the 10% required to update their firmware. I'll try again in the daylight today, however, as I did notice that no tags at all would pair until I moved into a differently lit area. Apparently they weren't kidding about requiring a well-lit area for the process, because this is the worst experience I've ever had with any variety of bluetooth pairing. If these do indeed all have dead batteries I'll just go ahead and return the Pro to buy either the Live version or just switch to Arccos.
  7. We'll see how the Pro goes when I attempt to use it tomorrow. I'll try to get setup out of the way tonight, but if it doesn't work I'll go ahead and just pick up a Live later instead. I enjoyed the statistics from Classic, so we'll see if I can work around the flaws or not.
  8. I spent $50, so even if it only works as well as the Game Golf Classic I'm alright. If not I can always return it to where I bought it from and get something better,
  9. For the last 4 years I've played a set of Mizuno MP4 blades, and before that I had the Ping S55's (a CB blade of sorts). Currently I'd say I'm not playing consistently enough to avoid hurting myself by using the MP4's, but I think just about anyone would be well-suited playing a set of clubs similar to the S55's. They were forgiving enough that larger mishits aren't disastrous, but they do provide noticeably more control and consistency than any of the SGI offerings. That said, after playing blades for a while there are only three types of mis-hits that I feel blades actually punish any more than CB, GI, or SGI irons do. The first, and biggest difference to me, is when you hit it fat. GI and SGI irons protect you from hitting it fat because they skid or bounce off the turf quite a bit, while blades and CB irons can dig deeper into the turf. The trade-off there is that it sucks to use a GI or SGI club when the ball is sitting in a dip or a divot. The second mishit punished more heavily by blades is toe strikes, just because most blade designs have very little mass and weight out near the toe. CB, GI, and SGI irons at least have perimeter weighting that makes these misses slightly less penal. The final shot I feel blades punish more heavily than other designs is catching the ball too high on the face. The "bouncy" face designs for GI and SGI irons mean you'll retain more ball speed there, and because the CB lacks a large mass behind the sweet spot there isn't as big a difference when you catch the ball a little higher. Blades just have nothing behind the ball high up on the face and it's particularly noticeable once you get too far above the sweet spot. For other shots, including small misses as shown in this data and especially thin or heel misses, the only difference I've found between blades and the rest is how good or bad it feels. Blades can really hurt to hit thin on a cold day, but that thin miss will perform about the same as a less painful thin miss using a SGI club. Heel misses are similar for all the clubs since they've all got some weight and mass over there and any twisting that perimeter weighting could alleviate is minimal since you're closer to the axis of rotation there than a toe miss would be. Heel misses can sometimes be a lot worse for GI and SGI irons because of the offset, which makes it easier/more likely that you get a shank instead of just a heel mishit. I don't think most golfers would be well-suited by playing MB blades, but I do think most golfers would be best suited by playing something similar to the old S55 irons or their modern equivalents. They provide increased consistency compared to GI/SGI irons while being a bit more comfortable to mishit and mitigating the effects of 2/3 scenarios where a blade punishes you more than other irons. You will still be punished more for fat shots than if you had a GI/SGI iron, but on all other types of mishits you'd be hard pressed to find a measurable and substantial difference. The only people who I believe can truly benefit from GI/SGI irons are the very infrequent or very new golfers who are far more likely to hit the ball fat and who have swings inconsistent enough for any difference in the club's consistency to be meaningless.
  10. I ended up biting the bullet and buying a GAME GOLF Pro unit because I was able to get a screaming deal. I had the classic model, but haven't used it since the belt clip on it broke more than a year ago now. I'm looking forwards to not having to remember to tag each shot, just because that was my primary issue with the old system. I made it part of my pre-shot routine for full swings, but there were still times where I didn't remember on chips and putts for the most part. I'm also interested in knowing if I will need to have the unit on my belt, or if it would be possible to leave the medallion in/on my golf bag. I usually set my golf bag only a couple feet away from my ball for every shot I take so that shouldn't be an issue, but I don't know whether it would have the range to still record putts with my bag set by the edge of the green. At the very least I can put the medallion into my pocket now to protect it from rubbing and pressing against my bag while I carry and potentially breaking the clip again. The clip on my GG Classic broke because I needed to place it behind my hip to stay out of the way, and that meant it would always rub/press into the bag while I carried my clubs. If I put the Classic into my pocket it would often rotate itself as I walked so that I had to search for the right surface to tag against. Since the Pro doesn't require manual tagging I ought to have no issues with placing it into my pocket in the first place.
  11. Now that my golf game has declined some from lack of practice I'm probably playing at a level between a 5 and a 10 handicap nowadays (10 at the start of the season, down to a 5 by the end). By measure of handicap I'm probably playing the wrong tees according to many. That said, I do this because I play tees based on a suitable course length for my driving distance. According to GAME Golf my typical drive is 308 yards, and based on the USGA and PGA's Tee it Forward chart I should be playing tees with an overall length between 7,150-7,400 yards. That translates to the tips for most courses, and on the one course I "regularly" play that's longer (TPC Colorado) I still play the tips because it's fun to compare my game to the pros I watched while scoring at the Korn Ferry Tour event there. Playing longer tees, even though I score worse, gives me a better experience on the course. My tee shots end up in the designed area, and the intended challenges of the golf course are still in play. I also play in a golf league through my work that uses tees with a yardage of 6,308 yards and the golf itself isn't as fun because I'm playing tees that were designed for someone who hits the ball substantially shorter than I do. My longest approach shot on any par 4, barring an exceptionally poor tee shot, is a sand wedge. The longest par 3 is a pitching wedge. The longest second shot on a par 5 with a decent tee shot is still only a 6 iron, and the short par 5's play longer than the long par 5's because I can easily cut the doglegs on the longer holes. There are two par 4's where I have to club down on the tee to avoid waiting for the green to clear, and four more par 4's where I have hit the green with my tee shot at least once in the past 5 years. Playing courses that are too short is still nice because you're golfing, but it takes a lot of the challenge and fun out of it. Ultimately I think the Tee it Forward campaign has a good set of recommendations for the length of course a player should play, based only on driving distance. Handicap shouldn't matter so long as you know the distance of your typical drive, since that's what determines if a course feels long or short in the first place. The main issue is just the fact that most golfers believe they hit the ball further than they actually do.
  12. Pretzel

    Carry or Push?

    It's unfortunate that so many courses have these restrictions about push carts on the green. In Australia golfers have a strong push cart culture and are encouraged to roll their carts over the greens because they found firmer greens are less likely to be damaged than softer (and more recently or heavily watered) fringes and fairways. They also have been found in many cases to improve the quality of the green by smoothing out spike marks and poorly repaired ball marks. Walking on the green, especially with a bag on your back, is ironically far more likely to damage the surface because of increased pressure (smaller surface area from the spikes vs wheels and much more weight from a person vs clubs).
  13. I caddied at a country club as well and this kind of politics is why I stopped. The course would ignore requests for multiple caddies in a group and instead give them one "seasoned" forecaddie so that he could make more money, rather than honor the request and allow more caddies out of the shack. Unless you wanted to sit around in a hot shack for a few summers first you weren't going to be going out onto the course or earning much. It meant that many of the "seasoned" caddies knew less about the course than the members they assisted since they so rarely got to go out previously.
  14. Pretzel

    Carry or Push?

    With a good quality push cart the cart will always be better. If you rent a cart from the course you're likely to be better off carrying since many rentals are old and the wheels have heavy resistance (in my area at least). I personally prefer carrying to pushing simply because it's what I'm used to and it means fewer things to keep in the trunk of my car, but I recognize that push carts are a much better option in terms of energy expenditure and personal health.
  15. To add to what @billchao mentioned, the position of the clubface at the top of your backswing is also very open. The toe of the club is pointed straight down, while a square clubface will be about halfway between vertical (as in your swing) and horizontal (if the toe pointed above your head). That said, the biggest culprit for your high and weak iron shots is most likely the flip of your wrist through impact. Having an open clubface can make you feel the need to flip the club to square the face, but the flip itself is what is adding loft to your irons at impact and leading to a very high trajectory. Inline impact is one of the fundamentals for a successful golf swing in addition to being the likely culprit of your current issue. This just means that the shaft of the club will reach the golf ball only after your left arm gets there first. This can be visualized as having a flat lead wrist, and on video it means that a line drawn from your elbow and through the lead wrist should be in-line with or ahead of your shaft at impact (ahead only if you want to de-loft the club for a lower trajectory). A good drill that can help you learn the feeling of inline impact is to grip an alignment stick with your club such that about a foot is left sticking out. Make swings like this without letting the stick hit you in the midsection, which is only possible if the club is behind or inline with your lead arm. If you flip and the club passes your arm, you'll feel it bump against your ribs. Once you have that feeling you can remove the alignment stick and start hitting golf balls, working slowly up to a full swing, while still keeping that shaft inline with your lead arm at impact. Video is super helpful in this process to make sure you're not going back to flipping once you remove the alignment stick and add a ball.
  16. The Mevo+ is the first "affordable" launch monitor that has piqued my interest, because previously my main hesitation towards buying one was how limited the data you received from the device ended up being. Spinrate is nice to know, but it's substantially more useful when you can also see either the ballflight or the spin axis. Since none of the previous affordable options included a spin axis they felt primarily limited to practice at a full driving range so you could see the ballflight. At a driving range the previous devices feel a little limited to me since I can measure distances myself and am able to determine if spin or launch is too high/low based on trajectory, but the specific data is always nice to have. Adding spin axis, however, means I can get all the information I want when hitting into a net at home. I have enough information to determine what the ballflight will look like and whether I'm making the progress I want to make, without having to go to the driving range to confirm that my feel corresponds to the correct ballflight. I'm looking forwards to seeing if competitors develop similar products and are able to continue to drive prices further down, because this feels to me like the right balance of enough data to appeal to most golfers while excluding data that would confuse them and drive up costs. If you know what the ballflight looks like and you can take videos of your swing, qualified instructors can help you fix the swing details (club path and face angle) that this doesn't measure to produce the result you want to see.
  17. The TST corporate offices will be closed as well, which is a large hindrance. There wasn't enough warning to set up proper secure VPN solutions to allow full work-from-home capabilities. We apologize for the inconvenience, but it truly is the only option for the near term moving forwards.
  18. I'm not sure that liquor and tobacco stores being open is a negative, and it could potentially help slow the spread of infection. I say this specifically because liquor and tobacco are available (in most states/areas) at grocery stores that will remain open throughout the entire crises as truly essential. People will still buy their liquor and tobacco, but with specific stores closed they would instead be going to a centralized location to do it which would become crowded with more people. Keeping separate liquor and tobacco shops open could have some type of social distancing effect in that it spreads the consumers out apart from one another, rather than clustering them all into a smaller number of stores. You do have to balance that with the question of whether those shops remaining open will encourage more people to go out. I would wager that no more people are going out, only the people who would already be going to buy it at the grocery store anyways, but I could be wrong. As far as golf goes, maintenance work shouldn't really pose much of a threat. It's not like maintenance workers are usually within 300 yards of the next closest worker, especially if they just staggered the start times so they weren't in the shop at the same time. They also are often wearing masks/respirators and gloves anyways as PPE.
  19. If you think tour professionals are good teachers, I've got a bridge to sell you. There are guys like Bubba Watson who can't teach because they learned by just hitting balls over and over again. Then there are other guys who have had one coach their entire lives and can't teach because they only know one way of going about things. Then there's the vast majority of the rest of them that can't teach because feel isn't real and while they can describe their feeling, they can't effectively communicate that to find the correct feeling for their student. Teaching something is an entirely different skill set than doing it, and in many cases requires the ability to do it and then some. University professors can certainly do everything they teach about, or else they wouldn't know enough to teach it. In the same way a quality golf instructor can do all of the things they teach, in terms of changing swings and hitting different kinds of shots. They may not be as consistent as the top pros in the same way a chemistry professor may not have memorized specific formulas the way a lab chemist has, but the breadth of knowledge is much wider because they have to be able to do it as well as know how to teach it. If you can't do something in golf you'll never be able to communicate and teach it effectively.
  20. In terms of a business proposition, this doesn't make as much sense as a large and low-stakes operation (such as the Myrtle Beach WorldAM). You're looking to profit off gambling which means you can learn a lot from the casino industry, and the thing about casinos is that only a very small percentage of their business is from the high rollers willing to make large bets. More than 65% of casino revenue comes directly from slot machines, because everybody can afford them and people can put their money in quickly. The number of people willing to bet in quantities that large is, quite simply, staggeringly small. Casinos know this, and its why they focus on increasing revenue and players for their slots machines rather than advertising lavish benefits for high rollers. A more prudent business idea would be a more widespread series of tournaments you host, focusing heavily on local advertising on nearby courses and pricing entry at only 10-15% above the cost of greens fees. You'll make less money per tournament, for certain, but smaller tournaments like that often fill to capacity when they look like fun and don't break the bank. You can also host many, many more of them in a year. I have no doubt there are people around the world willing to ante up for a $10,000 buy-in for a tournament. My doubt is that you would be able to reach enough of them without specific connections to make the event a reality. Among the people willing to pay that kind of entry fee, you'll find an even smaller percentage of them willing to do that without being wined and dined or given lavish benefits at the tournament itself. Most of the people with that kind of disposable income are entering this kind of tournament for fun, not because they are looking to turn a profit, and their expectations for the destination, food, and events off the course will reflect that. The people willing to make that buy-in for the money alone, and play a fairly standard course with no events outside of the golf itself, are a minority among the already small minority willing or able to pay the price of entry among the minority of people worldwide who even golf to start with. You're literally looking for the minority within the minority within the minority, which isn't impossible but does become prohibitively expensive without the right connections. This isn't trying to earn riches from the niches so much as it is trying to find 20 or more needles in a haystack.
  21. There is no way a tournament would have enough entries to support a $25,000 price without the entry fees themselves being absolutely ludicrous or there being too many players to make it onto the course. Your predicted prize pool is somewhere in the neighborhood of $50,000. Assuming the house takes a generously small 25% cut, that means that there is about $65,000 in entry fees just to support prize money and tournament organization. Assuming 100 players, a large number for a single course to host without PGA-level prep work, that's $650 of their entry fee going to just the prizes and tournament organizers. Then there's the greens fees - Myrtle Beach golf isn't cheap and each round of golf will cost you about $75 even with a bulk discount for organizing a tournament like that. The entry fee just went up to $725, and that's not even counting any other goodies included with the tournament. You expect players to pay $725 or more in tournament entry fees and just be okay with possibly being disqualified because they played well? You also expect players to accept getting disqualified, regardless of entry fees, when they stand to gain $25,000 because they just played the best golf of their life? You'd be up to your neck in lawsuits before you could even say, "statistics" because improbable doesn't mean impossible. You'd also be hard pressed to organize more than one of those types of tournaments a year, and the main draw for it would not be the cash prizes but the resort location it could be hosted at (since a local area would not support such a tournament, it would need to be travel-worthy). The golfers with a handicap to play in such a tournament (you'd need a high handicap to be interested, because low handicappers know they have no chance) are not the type to spend big bucks on tournament entry fees. Generally speaking, the majority of golfers willing to spend that kind of money for a tournament are low handicap players, so your audience would be incredibly limited. You'd also have to notify all golfers competing that they would need to revoke their amateur status before the tournament to accept any prize money in the end, which would turn off another large swatch of players. I could see it being fun for a very specific group of people, but the issue is that the exorbitant cost of hosting such an event combined with the very limited audience means it would be unlikely to catch on in any widespread fashion. Money doesn't grow on trees, and your potential customer base only gets smaller the larger the prize pool is because no sponsor will waste their money on that tournament's prize pool (it would not be televised and would receive minimal exposure) and the cost of entry would skyrocket accordingly.
  22. I can picture people getting disqualified unnecessarily because of that system, and the line of what is "too good to be true" for net scoring is entirely arbitrary. The bigger issue with net scoring, in general, is that the odds of a low handicapped golfer winning are near zero unless the handicaps are adjusted in a way that ends up making it too difficult for high handicap golfers to perform well. The primary issue is just that high handicap golfers have much more variability in their score than low handicap golfers, meaning a personal best followed by 2 above-average rounds (what it usually takes to win a big event's net scoring) is a substantially lower net score than a low-handicapper's personal best plus two above-average rounds. I imagine some people would be interested, as evidenced by the Myrtle Beach WorldAM, but many of the people who enjoy golf enough to enter and play in tournaments for cash prizes are also the type of golfers who would not play in net events. You could organize the events, but unless there's a draw besides just the money (such as the draw of playing in Myrtle Beach), you'll attract the same crowd that already plays in the men's club and city championship events. I can see there being some interest, just not nationwide interest because I still don't see anything that sets it apart from club championship or men's league style tournaments. They're the same thing essentially, but with net scoring only rather than net and gross.
  23. The primary reason it doesn't exist is because of the importance of the distinction between amateurs and professionals in the world of golf. These rules, plus the fact that the average golfer isn't that good compared to pros or top amateurs, mean nobody is motivated to play for the sole purpose of prize money in events like you describe. Low-handicap amateurs can't play in events like that, at least not events of any size, because they would earn too much to remain an amateur. Professionals wouldn't want to play in events like that because the purse would be too small to be worth their time (most of the prize money in professional tournaments comes from sponsors, not entry fees). As far as the weekend golfer is concerned, they wouldn't want to play it this type of tournament either because they wouldn't have a chance of winning. They know they won't finish in the top 10-20% of golfers in the tournament, so why throw their money away? The only people with a chance of winning are professionals and low-handicap amateurs, who wouldn't/couldn't want to play in the tournament for the reasons outlined above. Besides that, the format you describe is very similar to the tournaments hosted by men's/ladies club organizations at courses across the country, or city championships. The only real differences is that the competitions often include net payouts in those events, as well as those events having their payouts capped to avoid running afoul of amateur status regulations. The events also often accumulate points for a season-long overall championship. My city's championship event as well as all the nearby men's club events all pay out to the top X finishers using a portion of the entry fees. What specifically is different about those types of events from what you propose?
  24. I would agree with this sentiment. To not consider violations of the rules as cheating and penalize them accordingly, whether they be intentional or careless, undermines the entire purpose of having rules in the first place. As far as pace of play goes, I guarantee you the PGA Tour could play their rounds in 4.5 hours or less every single day of every single tournament if they did one thing: enforced the USGA pace of play policy using Rule 5.6a. Players would be allowed 40 seconds per shot. Players who fail to do this will be assessed one penalty stroke on the first occurrence. The second occurrence results in a two stroke penalty (or loss of hole in match play). The third, and final, occurrence is disqualification. As soon as penalties are on the table and penalties are strictly and evenly enforced the slow play problem will vanish literally overnight. When playing slow means losing strokes or possible disqualification, it will cause all the slow players on tour to suddenly play at a reasonable pace like they should. The fact that the PGA hasn't done this yet is proof enough that they don't actually care about slow play, considering the penalties they have given are few and far between.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...