Zeph

Technology can't do that. You want someone who knows what to look for and which actions to take. All you need then is a video of your swing. Here's some advice on how to film it: https://thesandtrap.com/b/playing_tips/filming_your_swing Once you got it on tape, you can post it here for other members of the forum to weigh in: https://thesandtrap.com/forums/forum/13-member-swings/ If you want some really good advice and professional analysis, you can try Evolvr: http://evolvr.thegolfevolution.com/

While we are on the subject, it's worth keeping in mind that this rule will change next year. This does not have any effect on your round, but next year your are not penalized by stepping on a ball or accidentally moving it while searching for it, as long as you replace it to the original position, or if that is not known for certain, as close as you estimate it. Ref: http://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/rules-hub/rules-modernization/major-changes/ball-moved-during-search.html Also worth noting is that the allotted time to search for a lost ball will be lowered from 5 minutes to 3 minutes. The new rules wouldn't have helped you in your case since you spent over 5 minutes. Ref: http://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/rules-hub/rules-modernization/major-changes/reduced-time-for-search-before-a-ball-is-lost.html

Yep, and the new system would help keep those players at a higher handicap. There are of course those that play a lot better in casual rounds than tournament rounds, but that's just not something the system can do anything about. Especially higher handicaps do fluctuate more in scoring relative to their handicap. With the new system, those poor tournament rounds will have a larger impact on the handicap than they do today. Then, the actual score will drag down the average used for calculating the handicap, while today its just 0.1 up.

I disagree, but also recognize that "disc issues" can span pretty far. I believe a lot more people than today would be able to get rid of most of their pain, often all of it, by being properly assessed, removing movements that isn't helping, and ingraining movements that are helping. Without training or any kind of exercise regime, a lot can be done by simply changing how you move every day. I think that's where the key often lies, not what happens half an hour three times a day at the gym. Most suggestions in this topic is about pain relief and temporarily removing the stress on the part of the back that's inflamed or hurting. A lot of it works because you are doing acitvities that aren't pushing anything on where it hurts, but that's why it's also just temporary. Once the activity is over, one goes back to the usual movement pattern and after not too long the pain starts again. McGill uses an analogy which is easy enough to understand. That if you hit your thumb with a hammer every five minutes through the day, not too hard, but enough to make it sore over time, the thumb will soon enough become sensitive and hurt every time you hit it. If you take the comparison further, you could say you got five hammers, each a bit larger and heavier. Throughout the day you hit the thumb with all five hammers at various times. The heaviest hammer could simulate someone doing heavy lifting at the gym with poor form or just doing an exercise which doesn't fit you. Because of the heavy load, it equals a larger hammer. Just bending forward to put on the socks in the morning might be the smallest hammer. If you are able to eliminate as many of those hits as possible during the day, the thumb will heal and get better. It might not be feasible to remove every single hit, but if you went from 50 hits a day to 20, that could have a significant impact on how your thumb feels. Here's an article he wrote about some myths out there about how to remove the pain and keep it away, taken from his book Back Mechanic: https://www.theptdc.com/2017/04/back-pain-myths/

Oh, really? I either didn't know or have forgotten. @iacas Yep. Good riddance I say.

I suggest looking up the works of Professor Stuart McGill. Arguably one of the leading experts on the back and spine. He's got some very clear ideas about what causes back pain and what you can do with it. His track record is also very good and they follow up all their patients. You can gather a lot of his general ideas through Youtube videos and articles, but if you struggle with chronic back pain without being able to find a lasting fix, he's written a book called Back Mechanic, which is a book written for the lay public with the headline "The sercrets to a healthy spine your doctor isn't telling you". It's a book where you can assess your own back and what you should do to get out of pain. It will not work on every case out there, but I believe it would help a lot of people. He has commented on the inversion tables in a clinic: https://youtu.be/IyGaKuSzD_M?t=3035 While acknowleding that it can have an effect on pain, it's not a fix and it doesn't remove the cause of the pain. For those people it helps on, it can relieve pain because you are decompressing parts of the body, but once you are back on your feet, things slowly return to normal. If you could find the pain triggers and avoid them, that would be a better long-term solution. There might even be positions where your pain is better relieved than the table, if you know how to find them.

He shouldn't be fourth. He's the best player of 2018 without a win, but as long as there are consistently good players that win every year and regularly get top 10s, it's difficult to climb past them without winning anything. Just by 2018 points alone (no divisors) he's still just 16th. With a few wins, he's certainly up there. You could almost call his 2nd place at the PGA as a win. The 60 points is more than the winner gets in a lot of the tournaments.

First of all, I get confused by the way you use the word "drop". Does that mean the handicap is lowered or increased? Because you use it both ways. The problem is not a 36 handicapper scoring 60 points, but I've seen many post rounds around 40-45. A round of 42 points for a 30 handicapper will lower their handicap with 4, down to 26. If they shoot 2-3 rounds like that during the year, they will quickly lower their handicap, but for most other rounds struggle to get close to 36 points. That's of course in the nature of a high handicapper, but I believe that the current system is making it more difficult to post a score closer to your handicap than one based on your average score over 20 rounds would do. A high handicapper can have 2-3 great rounds in one year and go from 36 to below 25, but they are often not that much better. And the handicap doesn't increase by 0.1 per point below the buffer zone. That's a flat 0.1 no matter how poorly you score. So the high handicapper can go out and shoot 42 points one round, drop 4 points in handicap and shoot 20 next round, only to gain 0.1 points. After 10 rounds of poor play below the buffer zone they are still just up one point, whereas they can shoot 38 points and drop back down again.

He had a fairly good thug earlier, but I think he paid Stevie a bit more than $25. 😛

185 is 40% of his total points at the moment. He's got 44 events, which gives 460.59/44 = 10.4672. Most comes from 2018 since he's won three times obviously. Justin Rose got almost half his points from before 2018. By significant I meant in comparison to Tiger, who's only got 18 events he could have gotten points on. His OWGR ranking will be closer to a realistic one once he's played close to 40 recordable events. Or stayed healthy long enough that he's been able to compete all the time in the two-year rolling average.

Ah, right. I thought those were weighted based on the field or something, but did't notice they got lower the older the tournament. They get weighted less then the longer it's been, until, as you pointed out, the 70 points are now worth 3.8. Thanks for the correction. My point still somewhat stands that most of the players in the top 30 has a significant amont of their points from pre-2018.

About time this topic was revived. It was falling too far behind in the lists.

Frequency is also something to consider. One miss isn't what we're talking about here. We are talking about someone standing on the tee at nearly every hole and being uncertain where to aim because he knows he could end up hitting both a hook or slice. If he aims left and the hooks comes out, he's in trouble. If the slice comes, he might even be in the fairway.

I think that is a better definition. If your planned shot always is a fade that sometimes goes straight, a consistent draw or hook would be a two-way miss. It's not so much the end result as the actual ball flight compared to what your intentions were.