Jump to content

Pretzel

Moderator
  • Content Count

    3,196
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    18

Everything posted by Pretzel

  1. Like many others have mentioned, I would prefer to be as close as I possibly can to the hole and will always take a closer "awkward" distance pitch over a further shot requiring a full or 3/4 swing. That said, my favorite full or close to full swing shots are my knockdown wedge yardages. I like hitting the knockdown shot because I feel like I have a lot of control with it over the distance and direction of the ball. That would be ~95 yards for the 60 degree, ~110 yards for a 56 degree, ~125 yards for a 52 degree, and ~140 yards for my pitching wedge (48 degrees). At most of these yardages (110, 125, and 140) I could take one club less and hit a full swing the same distance, but it doesn't feel as "in control" to me and I get a lot more spin when I do that. Wedges hit with full swings at those distances will usually spin back a little ways for me, and on some greens it'll spin all the way off the front even if I land in the middle. The knockdown wedge helps temper the spin and gives the shot a lower landing angle, meaning the ball usually just stays pretty much right where it landed.
  2. After a spring break trip to a Mexican hotel with a par 3 course, I started wondering what the longest par 3 people have played was. The hole marker that prompted this question can be seen below. 276 yards was definitely the longest I've ever encountered!
  3. I like to always keep beef jerky in my golf bag, since it's a good snack to munch on while you play if it's been a while since you last ate. Most importantly is water though. I drink a boatload of it, usually 4-6 liters per day even when I'm not out golfing. When I am on the course I carry my 1L bottle and usually fill it no less than 3 times and up to 6 times in a single round, depending on the conditions.
  4. To address this, no that's not how any of this works. There are well-documented examples of other systems that deny access to "public taxpayer facility" to people who are alone and they hold up just fine in a court of law. These examples are called HOV lanes, publicly funded roads that are not available to those driving alone. You have the same access as everyone else to the facility. Nobody is denying you access based on any protected class, nor are they specifically targeting you. They have a blanket policy that applies to everyone which prohibits singles from reserving in advance. You can get around this by either playing as a fill-in golfer to pair up with groups, or you can play with other golfers. I'd be wiling to bet they even have a men's club that would allow you to meet and find other golfers to play with and reserve tee times.
  5. For me it depends. By and large I will use a 60 degree lob wedge for most of my shots around the green (80% or more) since I grew up just delofting the club to get lower chips with more roll. That said, a lob wedge does put more spin on the ball when you start delofting it since you tend to also get more steep with your swing, so if I really need a ball to roll I'll use a 56 degree or 52 degree wedge accordingly.
  6. I'll second the idea of definitely applying, even if you aren't certain about it (just let them know about the uncertainty so you can be one of the later picks if they follow the same format as last time). It was a fantastic deal for the quality of the lodging and golf, and just an overall blast with the competitive atmosphere combined with putting faces and names to the "other" faces/names you see regularly online.
  7. @flashypaws, there is so much that is both factually incorrect and contradictory to the laws of physics (not to mention you meant Newton's 3rd law, not 2nd) in your post that I'm amazed you managed to get through the admittedly lackluster physics programs in the high schools of the United States or elsewhere without failing it miserably.
  8. Which, if you'll notice, is exactly what I said (see below). Good guess on the average though, since the average driver swing speed of the average golfer according to Trackman is 93.4 mph. Your original post made it seem like you thought nobody short of pros could swing that fast. The statement of 110-120mph being freakish among amateurs is incorrect, because I'd consider it unexpected if I went to a course and didn't find a few regular golfers that fit that category unless the course was a real dog track. A freakish swing is one that you're surprised to see, not one that you're surprised to never see.
  9. The golfers I know that swing 110-120mph only encompasses about 70% of the people who I played with and against regularly through high school in RMJGT and AJGA events. Plus all the guys on the team at the college I currently attend. Plus the 3 or 4 guys at the local men's club who are 5 handicaps or better. Plus a good 80-90% of the field in every US Amateur or US Open qualifier I've played in. My normal driver swing was 124mph last time I measured it when I was 17 at one of those Bridgestone ball fitting events, no idea if it's faster, slower, or the same speed nowadays. All told that probably makes up a few hundred different golfers I've met or played with that swing at least 110 mph, with maybe 20-30 that I knew well enough to name and about 5 that were in the 130+ range. No joke, the fastest swinger (and longest hitter) I ever knew had a swingspeed of 138 mph. He played on my high school team and went on to play for the Air Force Academy afterwards, swung so damn fast that he caved in the face of a driver that wasn't even 2 years old. These players aren't at all the majority of golfers, and my perspective is biased since I've played a lot of tournaments with a lot of good golfers, but it's not as tiny of a population as you seem to think it is.
  10. Thanks for the clarification. I went along with it because I didn't have the decision book on hand to understand exactly what was meant by "carried by or for the player". It appears that the term "carried" is used quite literally, meaning that the components or club is being carried around on the course by someone. The decision the tournament organizers came to was that "carried" was used more closely to the way it is in retail operations, meaning that if it was stocked or present specifically for you then it was disallowed. Makes sense that they'd use that meaning of the word since the tournament organizers were just the PGA pros that handle the retail operations for the 3 city courses, but a little disappointing that they didn't know the rules well enough to understand otherwise. Either way, I was "lucky" that in my scenario there wasn't much reason to insist upon a literal interpretation of the rule. I had a 4-shot lead through 27 holes (54 hole tournament, one at each of the 3 city courses), but my best guess is the damage occurred on the 28th hole and I didn't notice until the 2nd hole of the 3rd round. The "break" was weird because the shaft didn't actually separate into two pieces, it just got loose enough that the two pieces would slip and let the clubhead rotate whenever I hit the ball (or when I finally noticed the grip was no longer lined up and twisted the clubhead 180 degrees with my hand to confirm what happened). From the 10th hole of the second round onwards I couldn't hit anything but a snap hook with the driver, including on the range and despite being able to still fade, draw, and even slice a 3-wood just fine, so I'll just blame the 6th place finish and 3 balls in hazards off the tee on the driver to protect my pride 😁. The replacement driver worked out well too, since the pro had the same model (G30, he was PING staff) with a white tie shaft that provided similar high launch and low spin characteristics to the Bi-Matrix (but without a critical shaft failure, thankfully).
  11. One question of clarification on this point (clubs carried for the golfer). I thought it was previously still prohibited if the player had, for example, an extra set of clubs or specific components set aside for him. I was under the impression that if you had your second bag of clubs in the trunk of your car, or on the tour van, you would be unable to use those specific clubs because they were there for you specifically and nobody else. I ask if the wording changed to being a club carried on the course, but still allowing clubs set aside off the course, because I encountered this specific situation once in a tournament. My driver shaft broke mid-round during the 2015 city championship, and because it was the second time one of those driver shafts (Grafalloy Bi-Matrix, both had the epoxy between the graphite and metal fail) failed in the same summer I had taken to carrying my old driver in the trunk of my car whenever I went golfing just in case. When the tournament officials were consulted it was determined I could not use my old driver from my car because it had been brought for my specific use, rather than being available to any player, and that I had to instead borrow a driver from the course's head pro. I could be completely wrong here, which is why I was wondering if this was a change that was made specifically with regards to clubs taken from a player's own locker or other clubs that were specifically his but not physically on the course itself (even if on the premises or in the parking lot).
  12. That's a really good point, and I have to say that I'm really grateful for all the photos @RandallT took (including my current profile pic!). It was a great way of documenting the action since I personally am not somebody who takes photos all that often, and in total I have 7 photos that I actually took myself from the event with 3 of them being the llamas from Talamore next to the teebox. It's fun to go back every so often and scroll through the photo album to enjoy the memory again.
  13. It depends on how exactly you read it, but I think that it would hold water from a legal standpoint. It feels kind of like the Oxford Comma thing that cost a Maine dairy company a huge amount of money because of ambiguous phrasing. Do you read it as $100 off "a Wi-Fi system and a year of eero Plus" or do you read it as $100 off "a Wi-Fi system", and a year of eero Plus? Either reading is grammatically correct, but it would take a lot of arguing in a courtroom to prove that one or the other is legally correct since there doesn't seem to be much precedent that I can find for this type of thing. Here's a good link discussing what constitutes deceptive advertising: https://www.classlawgroup.com/consumer-protection/false-advertising/deceptive-advertising/ I don't think this would be considered to mislead a "reasonable consumer" since it is grammatically correct either way you interpret the phrase. However, I do think their implementation of the discount would run afoul of the law. They claim you can receive $100 off, but you didn't. You only got $99 off with the advertised coupon code. If they simply reduced the price in the cart of any order that contained a Wi-Fi system and eero Plus in it by $100 they might be able to get away with the ambiguity in the wording. They do not do this, however, and only offer $99 off when they advertised $100 off the purchase. This is how I see it, simply as a layperson who has done a fair amount of reading into the law but holds no certification or formal education in law. I'd be interested in hearing input from someone with qualified legal expertise (such as @DeadMan?), but I can understand if they would prefer to not weigh in lest it be considered legal advice or if their areas of expertise differ from the subject of advertising law.
  14. So let's break down what you're advocating for here: Big/important tournaments (with bigger purses) are worth more for people who win than small/unimportant tournaments (with smaller purses) Placing higher earns you more points Missing the cut earns you zero points At the end of the year the person who won the most points/earnings wins the FedEx Cup with no resets in the middle Congratulations! You just recreated the current FedEx Cup points system, but with bigger numbers for the points and no playoffs in the fall. Currently the tournaments with big purses (WGC, Majors) award more points than the tournaments with smaller purses (John Deere, Wyndham Championship, etc.), and the points are awarded with more points going to people who finish higher (just like more money going to people who finish higher). The only difference between what you suggest and how it really works is that the current playoff events also give additional points to make things more exciting at the end of the year. This also, funny enough, coincides with larger purses in the events like the Tour Championship compared to many standard tournaments. If you look at the 2018 PGA Tour money list (https://www.pgatour.com/stats/stat.109.2018.html) vs the 2018 FedEx Cup standings (https://www.golfchannel.com/article/golf-central-blog/final-fedexcup-results-rose-wins-10-million) you'll notice they look remarkably similar with just a few minor changes to the order based on how players performed in the playoffs.
  15. Best non-golf achievement would probably be before I hit puberty doing the high jump. I was only 4'10" tall and jumped 5'6" to win at the district track/field meet. Then I grew 5" in the next year or so and could never jump above 5'2" again, I guess my size started catching up to my legs.
  16. They'd be silly to use a full AI to power the swing recognition and it's honestly surprising to me, as someone who does hardware and software for similar-ish devices, that they're having such a hard time with recognizing swings. The force on the club when it hits the ball is not insignificant, and if you're looking at a plot from an accelerometer it's REALLY obvious where an impact happened compared to a practice swing, unless you chunk the crap out of a practice swing. To put into perspective how ridiculous it is if they're using a neural network to try and track your shots, most neural networks require several thousand pieces of training data, if not more depending on the complexity of the task, to start delivering accurate or reliable results. You'd literally have to play dozens of rounds before your expensive new device would even start to think about working properly. The processing power required is also, generally speaking, much larger than would be feasible for a simple task like this. It would NOT run well on a phone, it would run slowly on most people's desktop PC's, and it would take stupid amounts of processing power (and money) for them to run it as part of their cloud/online services. This is literally the type of thing I'm doing at work right now (Q-learning neural networks), and you'd have to be mad to try and use it for this application.
  17. I also played a similar shot in the Newport cup, the video of the tee shot that led to it is actually on the site. Hooked my tee shot into the trees on #12 and was down in the match (to @coachjimsc himself actually, I believe) so I had to try and get my second shot onto the green since he piped his drive down the middle. The shot in the video isn't actually too tight, in terms of the gap he had, since the trees are so close to him. The further away they are the harder the shot becomes, since the angular measurement between the two trunks shrinks.
  18. For my driver I've only had 2 in the past 10 years, the G10 and my current G30. I still test out new drivers occasionally, but unless I see a measurable difference in distance, accuracy, or forgiveness I don't bother buying anything. I have, however, had to receive a replacement G30 head (Grafalloy Bi-Matrix shaft broke on my follow through and launched the head into a bunch of rocks) and had to replace the shaft a second time (after the second Bi-Matrix broke in the same way, I switched to a Tour AD-DI). I liked the Bi-Matrix shafts, but the two I used had some serious problems with the epoxy that holds the steel and graphite portions together. For my woods I've only owned one 3-wood in the last decade. I don't use it terrible often, but the one I have (a G10) looks good to my eye and is easy enough for me to hit. It's much better off a tee than off the grass, but that's fine since that's where it gets the majority of its use. This is not because of the club, though, it's just because I installed a cut down and heavily tipped driver shaft in it so that I could get more out of it off the tee and hit shots that bore into the wind off the ground. My irons have been replaced twice in the last 10 years. I started with PING Eye 2 irons and played with them until the grooves of the 8 iron were rolled over onto each other and flattened. I then bought a set of S55 irons which I liked (I honestly miss that 3-iron, it was stupid easy to hit) and used for several years. After that I bought used sets of Mizuno MP4's and de-chromed Titleist 716MB's to try, then sold the two used pairs and bought myself a new set of MP4's (the used clubs were just a way of getting an extended trial period before buying what I really wanted). I've used those for the last 3 years or so. Wedges get replaced every other year. I'd like to replace them every year, and used to while I played more in high school, but in college I haven't played enough to justify that. For putters I have used 3 different models and 4 different putters over the last ten years. I started with a Newport Midslant, later bought a Newport 2, traded the Newport 2 for a Newport Notchback, and then picked up another Newport 2. All of my putters are very similar in design, but realistically I like the Newport Notchback the most for its heavy weight. Some days I'll bring the other putters out instead just for fun and to change it up, but realistically I used the Midslant for 5 years, the Newport 2 for 1 year, and the Notchback for the last 4.
  19. I was wondering about the 2019 rendition of the cup. I'll have to start filming B-roll for the Rocky style comeback training montage with the 6 inches of snow that just got dumped here locally. One big plus, if it's in/near Las Vegas, is the very cheap flights available. I'll also finally be 21 by the time October rolls around, so when in Vegas...
  20. I'm enjoying Apex Legends, it's great fun to play with friends. I like the idea of returning someone who's been killed to the game through their banner and drop ship mechanic, and the movement mechanics (such as sliding) that carried over from the Titanfall games are fantastic. To me it's got just the right balance to discourage camping and encourage actually moving in to engage. To win in Fortnite you have to be a master builder, in that it's almost more important than the gunplay itself to be able to build up defenses and such. A cool mechanic, but not my cup of tea. PUBG rewards camping a lot, since sniping is so strong and armor has durability. If you get into a lot of fights, you're going to be weaker later on when it counts because you'll never have full strength body armor and helmets. It's also just a buggy mess despite being released years ago and making millions of dollars, which was funny for a while but loses its charm quickly. My only real complaint about Apex is the random crashes, I haven't really managed to find a fix for that yet. I imagine the developers are probably working on something, but it's still frustrating. Just remember to ping every Mozambique you see on the ground, it's important people know where to find the best gun in the game.
  21. I mentioned this as reasoning for why I thought 1 in 4,000 was a conservative estimate for my skill level. I suppose I stated it backwards though, saying the odds would go up. To clarify, I think this challenge is easier than hitting a hole in one in general during a round of golf. You get 250 attempts each day at the same pin position, and you get a LOT of practice at the same shot (+/- 10 yards) as the month goes on. For me the fatigue of hitting 250 balls isn't an issue, though I can see it being a problem for those who aren't fresh out of their teenage years.
  22. I put 1 in 4,000 because the last official handicap I had was +1.2, so I figured the assumption of being about half as good at hitting a hole in one as a pro seemed reasonable. No handicap on my profile currently because I didn't keep one last year. That's not how cumulative probability works. Each event is independent, but the cumulative probability of multiple events is a factor of the probability of each event happening. Flipping 5 heads in a row, for example, is less likely than flipping 2 heads and 3 tails. There is only one scenario where I lose the bet: when I miss every single shot. If I subtract the probability of this even from 1, I get the probability of this event NOT happening (in other words, I win). To find the probability of two independent events happening in a row, you multiply their probabilities together as I did there (7,500 times, because it needs to happen 7,500 times in a row for me to lose). The odds of a coin being heads twice in a row is .5 x .5, or .25. Thus, the odds of me losing the bet is 1-(3999/4000)^7500. To go back to the 5 heads example, the probability of anything BUT 5 heads happening is 1 - the probability of 5 heads. This is 1 - (.5)(.5)(.5)(.5)(.5), or 1 - (.5)^5, or 1 - 1/32. The probability of flipping a coin 5 times and NOT getting 5 heads is 31/32. This is similar to the proposed bet, because there is only one scenario where you lose (7,500 missed shots in a row), and every other possible scenario (all the way from 1 hole in one to 7,500 holes in one) is a win.
  23. We know the odds are somewhere between 1 in 12,500 and 1 in 2,500, depending on player skill. Let's assume that I am on the better end and my odds are 1 in 4,000, and the total number of shots is still 7,500. The overall probability of success is pretty simple, using the formula below: PSuccess = 1 - (PFailure)^n Where n is the number of failed attempts, and PFailure is the odds of failure for any 1 attempt (3999/4000). This gives us the overall probability of success as being: PSuccess = 1 - 0.1533 = 0.8467 In other words, I might have an approximately 84.67% chance of success if I were to take this bet with my odds of any one shot being a hole in one being 1 in 4,000. I imagine the odds might go up after hitting so many 8-irons every day, so 1 in 4,000 seems like a somewhat conservative number. I'd take this bet though. I have an approximately 85% chance of winning 5 million dollars, and if I fail I'm still young enough that 5 years in prison wouldn't be life-ruining (assuming it didn't come along with some kind of felony on my rap sheet).
  24. I usually like to play in the mid-afternoon when there's a bit of a lull on the courses, at least at the ones I play at. They're usually booked solid up until noon on the weekends, and then the tee sheet is sparse until the 3:00 or 4:00 twilight golf deal starts up.
  25. Here's a comparison of you at the top versus Tiger Woods (I chose a 7i swing of his since it looked like you were hitting some sort of mid-iron like that). You can see that your overly long backswing is a result of two different things. Your wrists are appear to be hinging too far (Tiger's are at 90 degrees or less, yours appear well past 90 degrees) in addition to your arms themselves going too far back (shoulders appear to be rotated about the same amount between the two of you, but Tiger's arm isn't pressed as tight against his chest). You can see the same thing here from Dustin Johnson, a player with a long backswing, who has his shoulders rotated similarly to yours but his lead arm not folded as far across him and his wrists not hinged quite as far. This is what I meant by feeling like the arms are more "in front" of you, is that having the lead arm folded as tightly across your body as you do is not going to give you extra distance (it's not "usable" extra lag because it puts your arms too far behind you) and it will make the swing harder to control, at least from my experience. For reference, this is what my swing used to look like at the top of the backswing when I was doing something very similar, alongside the excellent caption/commentary provided by @iacas. Yours definitely isn't as dramatic with the arms as mine was, and I think the wrists are contributing far more to the overly long backswing than your arms are. The arms in front discussion I think would be beneficial for you though, since you say it makes your wrists feel like they're doing nothing. Currently your wrists are doing too much, so the proper amount of wrist action will feel like not much at all to you, and it can have the added benefit of keeping your right elbow pointing closer to the camera (avoiding arm overswing) at the top of your backswing at the same time. The feel for me that @iacas gave that worked well was keeping my hands "in front of my chest". It would be very helpful to see a video of you trying out the feel where you said that it felt like your wrists were doing nothing. That's the best way to tell if that is setting you on the right path or if it isn't quite correct.
×
×
  • 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...