Jump to content

imsys0042

Established Member
  • Content Count

    960
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Posts posted by imsys0042


  1. 22 minutes ago, drmevo said:

    I think there is more to consider than politics at this point.  If Bill Cosby owned a comedy club, I would avoid it for the same reasons I would avoid Trump's golf courses.

     

    I agree.   Deciding to not be bothered, or be bothered, is a case by case basis for me.  Trump is the owner and front man of his company and properties.  That has more of a direct impact that other cases in the past few years.   He also is very closely involved with his properties.   he doesn't just buy something and tell them where to send the checks.

    I'd argue that differing politics should rarely be a case to engender such action.   However politics now encompasses a large number of issues that are outside the core political realm of economics, education, public safety and the military.   Many of those issues generate much more emotional responses and hence stronger reactions.  Trump has taken positions on some subjects that makes me very angry and hence I would not support him.


  2. Back to the topic, I voted that I am not sure.   Earlier this year when I played a lot more I was beating my handicap more than 50% of the time, so I definitely feel like it helped me game the system.   Now that I can only play once per week for the time being, it's cutting the other way.   I spend several holes struggling until I hit my stride and shoot what was normal months ago.  Frustrating being +6 or +7 over the first 5-6 holes and then being +2 or so the rest of the holes.   And if I am having an off day then I am no where near my handicap and would lose all ways.

    As a golfer I feel obligated to follow the rules and not post, so I keep it myself separately (or was, I fell off tracking it). But I certainly don't have to like it.


  3. On 10/11/2016 at 10:00 AM, Ernest Jones said:

    Personally, I think the Sand Trap would benefit greatly from a complete ban on politics and religion. Plenty of other outlets for that without sullying the Trap. 

    I saw something to that affect on the Grill Room page.   Personally as a community I'd hate to see things that people talk about regularly be banned.  Putting it into a corner of this site seems to make sense.   Unfortunately that creates overhead for the moderators because when it gets out of hand (hey, we'are all human it happens) and no one wants to see things get out of hand.

    We're a community here, someone going off the deep end has repercussions.  While I'd not cry a river if there was such a ban, I'd prefer that we self police and people who are interested in being a part of this forum respect the rules lest they find themselves on the outside looking in.

    I am totally committed to one side of the political argument but have not seen many people on the other side of my views that I disrespect based on what has been posted here.   Those few that have crossed a line are people that I will probably avoid in the future.  That's very much like what I would do to someone in real life. 


  4. I went from 9.5 to 11 to 12 and have not lost any distance.  At 12 I can bomb the ball.  Personally I don't find bumping my driver to 12 affected my ability to find the fairway.  It's all about launching more optimally.  

    If you want to go this route then maybe it's the shorter shaft which might help for more control?   Maybe try choking down on the driver you have a bit?   I do that a lot for when I need to hit further than a 3-wood but can run out of room with a full driver. 

    Regardless.  If you are going to carry a driver I would base the loft on optimizing launch angle.  I notice no difference in hitting fairways between my 9.5, 11 and 12 lofts.  The 12 loft just gives me what my pro considers an optimal arc thru the air. 


  5. 27 minutes ago, drmevo said:

    Very interesting. My blow-ups are definitely worse when I play with other people. One really bad shot and I don't know if it's the embarrassment or what, but I struggle to recover, especially if it involves OB or a hazard. It's like I can't think straight.

    When I'm by myself I seem to be able to talk myself back into the right mindset, and I make better choices and shots after a mistake.

    This happens to me as well.  However I can have some pretty dire blow-ups playing alone as well.   Just fewer.

    I voted "Something else".   Basically I don't know because I let my own tracking go and didn't keep up with it.   I play a lot late on weekends and used to play on Wednesday mornings and people are rarely around.   I think the rule change sucks because if the intent is to prevent cheating then cheaters will find another way.

    Someone also responded that this is part of a step to converge handicap systems and have one global standard.   That may be, but I think it's a mistake.   Plenty of pitfalls playing by yourself as well and I think that solo rounds should count, IMO.


  6. I regret not taking lessons sooner and I regret getting so frustrated with the game and letting it show.  TBH, I've had a very difficult time emotionally and golf is my bail-out and when it doesn't go well it crushes me.   But that's not anyone else's issue.  Since my daughters were born I've truly felt lucky to have my life be exactly as it should and that trickles down.

    Otherwise, I suspect that the deathbed feeling will be that I didn't play even more than I do now.   Golf is a worthwhile pursuit that is above work and many other things in life.   Truly a bad day at golf is better than most other things I have to do.


  7. I have a rangefinder and a voice caddy.   In general when the greens are weird shapes and I don't feel that front/middle/back tells me enough I use the range finder.   Otherwise I feel that center of the green tells me enough on many courses.   Voice Caddy is pretty much the same information as a GPS watch.   I happen to already wear a watch on both wrists, so I don't have room for a third.

     


  8. 3 hours ago, CarlSpackler said:

    I'm wondering if anyone has changed their vote based on the either of the debates.

    Usually there is some percentage of the population who is undecided and the debates help.   However they also serve another purpose.  Political campaigns are largely echo chambers now and the debates are the rare opportunities where candidates are challenged in a forum they don't control.  If they make a telling mistake it can turn non-tribal voters off and change votes.

     


  9. 45 minutes ago, newtogolf said:

    Pence and his campaign manager can only spin doctor so much.  For Trump to have a chance to win the general election he needs to ban himself from posting on all social media and perform much better in the next debate

    He has toned down the orange spray tan, but social media?  Never, ever!   He's addicted!!  I think he'd give up eating before not posting on Twitter.   Someone would have to wrestle him to the ground, take his devices away and then tell him to put his big head down on the desk.


  10. 8 hours ago, Chilli Dipper said:

    Kaine spent more time attacking Trump than discussing the issues; Pence made up a completely different platform than the one his running mate is campaigning on. Not sure what to make of the VP debate.

    It was....odd...to say the least.   I pretty much agree with your take.   I am disappointed in Kaine.   I don't think he is suited to the role of attack dog.   The moderator did not do a great job either.   Either let the candidates get away with not responding or cut them off at certain points.

    In the end, Pence got the better of the debate.  I wonder how many "Kaine interrupted" memes are floating around on twitter today.


  11. I have the MP-69s and love them.   when I did my shaft fitting I used MP-4s and loved them as well.   The MP-69s are a little bigger.   Feel is great.   I love them.   I hope to have them for a very long time.

    if you google "Mizuno iron numbering" you'll get a couple of hits from other golf forums.   I didn't see anything obvious in a search here.


  12. 3 minutes ago, Kalnoky said:

    Guys, Donald Trump is going to lose in the biggest landslide since Ronald Reagan defeated Walter Mondale. I don't believe the polls at all.

    I watched the first debate but I will not be watching the others. I'm going to play twilight instead.

    It's Washington. Always expect more of the same. 

    I think what has changed since then is that barring a candidate shooting someone on live TV, certain states have enough inbuilt support for one party that at least 15 states will go for one side.

    I think Hilary has a chance to get states that otherwise would not go blue into her column this election, but Trump as bad of a candidate as he is*** will get double digit states.

    *** Not talking about issues, policies or anything other than he is unpredictable, unconventional and has issues that historically would not win him anything in a "normal" year.   His unfavorables are extremely high but not high enough to still poll well in areas of the country.


  13. My former home course had this.   They had:

    Gold  (back)

    Blue (longer men's tees)

    White (shorter men's tees)

    Silver (Senior)

    And then:

    Gold / Blue

    Blue / White

    White / Silver

     

    Each of those combos would take what was considered to be the 9 easier holes of the 18 and put them at the back tees so that it was graduated in difficulty.   Also, it was a great way to play if you were a shorter hitter because you still added/deleted some length but the course wasn't completely different for you.


  14. 5 minutes ago, iacas said:

    Not true.

    A record-setting vote for a third-party candidate would not have the same effect as low voter turnout.

    Plus, at an even more basic level than "sending a message," voters choosing a third-party candidate are still voters who might have, without a third-party candidate they supported at all, might have voted for one of the first two. The math doesn't work. I'm sure you can Google it, too, but… here's one example: http://www.redstate.com/leon_h_wolf/2016/03/16/vote-third-party-candidate-vote-hillary/ .

    I was mulling this over since this morning and here's what I think.  David is correct that the primary has the most impact because veering towards one candidate as an alternative vs. another is the most effective way to get a better candidate.  Or at least the one you want.

    However for effective third parties to rise, you need to have them outside the political parties that exist.  They either need to get on the ballot as a member of one of the two parties or run a primary of their own and be on the ballet next to the existing 2.

    What third parties have tried to do is get 5% of the popular vote in the general to get access to a lot of matching federal funds.  So their impact is best achieved at the general election level.

    Since Perot I don't think we've seen anyone get near 5%.  Nader was under 3%.   Nader probably swung Florida to Bush, so that's a direct impact.   Perot got 19% and potentially knocked Bush out.  So there is a measurable impact in a tighter election (I consider Perot an outlier).   Voting for a third-party candidate is probably a net "the same as not voting" in this election because I suspect it's such a wonky year that third parties will drain from both.

    2000 is an example where there was a direct impact.   Over 2000 people voted for Nader and Gore lost by 537 (officially).   Those 2000 people were motivated enough to vote for someone who wasn't going to win.  If a majority of them go and pull the lever for Gore, the election goes the other way (demographics strongly supported Nader voters leaning to Gore).  However what we don't know (and makes this speculation) is how many of them would have been motivated to show up for Gore and would that been enough?

    David's statement only holds true if those voters would have not pulled the lever for someone else.   Or in other words they only thing that motivated them was voting for the third party.  It doesn't take into account a voter who is going to vote no matter what, and if the two main parties are on the ballot then that is who they have to choose from.   Where David is correct (IMO) is that it's not a vote for one of the people who have a shot at winning.

     


  15. 52 minutes ago, boogielicious said:

    Remember you must put your response outside the quote box or it will show up blank when someone quotes you.

    Doh!   

    Actually the Simpsons quote I was referring to was the Halloween special where the aliens Kang and Kodos ran for office, replacing Bob Dole and Bill Clinton.   The quote was:

    Oh, no! Aliens, bio-duplication, nude conspiracies! Oh my God! Lyndon LaRouche was right!

    And this page has a lot of goodies from it:

    http://simpsons.wikia.com/wiki/Treehouse_of_Horror_VII/Quotes


  16. 39 minutes ago, David in FL said:

    The fact of the matter remains.  In the general election, a vote for anyone other than either of the 2 main candidates has the same impact as not voting at all.  

    That's true for the outcome of the election, however there is a wider implication.  By pulling enough votes away from the 2 main candidates it can set the stage for other political parties to emerge and greater influence the 2 party system.   The US has never effectively had to deal with coalition governing, however as the parties are moving to their more extreme endpoints (policy wise), it leaves a lot of people in the middle outside of many policy points.

    Consider the Tea Party.  They identify as Republicans, however they zero in on a subset of issues within the party platform. If they decided to switch to "I" for independent tomorrow, that affects the balance of power in the House.   Or just as Independents in the Senate will caucus with the Democrats, but are not labeled as such and could not affiliate with neither party.

    It would be extremely difficult, but if over 2-4 general election cycles a small, but if significant number of a third party candidates won seats in Congress you would have a position where one of the 2 parties would have to compromise with them to govern.

    What makes the Presidency attractive to promote these parties is that it is the highest visibility contest to get supporters.  


  17. 21 hours ago, Golfingdad said:

    Same here, and some of the questions I just quickly chose something and it's a topic that I don't really have an opinion on.


    Eating lunch at my desk so I retook the quiz and answered almost entirely with the elaborated stances, as well as weighting my answers and got ...

    96% Hillary Clinton

    96% Jill Stein

    23% Gary Johnson

    19% Donald Trump

    It's a tie!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  Crap, I don't know what I'm gonna do now. :hmm:

    Shame Lyndon Larouche isn't running....


  18. 94% Hillary Clinton
    80% Jill Stein
    36% Gary Johnson
    29 %Donald Trump
     

    Little surprising to me that I ended up at 94%, however I weighted nothing so they all had the weight.   I found myself doing quite a number of the Other Stances which seem to clarify things more.

    However it all has to be taken with a grain of salt, there are some things that the public does not know that affects these decisions.  Also some of these the stance I want to take are next to impossible to implement.   I would prefer an international response on a couple of the Foreign Policy questions, but in fact that would probably never happen in reality.   Sometimes bad choices are the only choices you have.


  19. I'm not sure it's worth anyone except Google to purchase it.   Google Plus was a great social network for the 23 people who signed up for it, so Google could use some help there.   Twitter does have a horrible trolling problem and too many people jump on band wagons to harass people.

    Now it is a unique service and can be used very effectively.  I don't use it that much, but it's possible to do some really good things with it.   But to me it's the least of the social networks.  

×
×
  • 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...