• Announcements

    • iacas

      Visit FlagstickRule.com   03/13/2017

      Visit the site flagstickrule.com to read about and sign a petition for the USGA/R&A regarding the one terrible rule in the proposed "modernized" rules for 2019.

skydog

Established Member
  • Content count

    677
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

skydog last won the day on October 2 2016

skydog had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

89 Power and Finesse to Spare

About skydog

  • Rank
    Dedicated Member

Personal Information

  • Your Location
    Richmond, Virginia

Your Golf Game

  • Handicap Index
    9
  1. Maybe we can start a movement to boycott any sponsor that gives this turd an exemption once he loses his card (joking...mostly)
  2. In this article on the story Shack mentions that Dufner is on a 2 year 'media blackout'...I guess he hasn't talked to the media for two years? Anyone else heard this? Seems like a d bag move on his part IMO. http://www.geoffshackelford.com/homepage/2017/4/17/when-it-comes-to-sportsmanship-dufner-is-a-slouch.html
  3. Got it. Not surprising, but hadn't actually heard any of that before.
  4. I've never been a Dufner fan at all for various reasons but I don't find this offensive in the least.
  5. Would love to hear more about this... I'm in the "no" camp as well. At least that's what I'm hoping for.
  6. Agreed, it should be one of the premier non-major events of the year but it gets lost in the post-Masters hangover.
  7. Being a tour pro for the "average" pro is a tough life. I think this guy probably has the talent to rack up some $$ on tour, but if not and you've got the education/desire to succeed in business, I don't blame him for just wanting to stay an amateur.
  8. I was thinking the same thing when he was talking. I'm only luke warm on the 18 hole playoff (too drawn out and anticlimactic on Monday IMO) but I like that every major has a different format.
  9. Sorry to miss it but the wife has grounded me from leaving town that weekend as it's bumping up too close to her due date. Hope everyone has a good time
  10. I had never really thought about this before because it's the way it's always been but I like the intensity that sudden death creates. I understand that if you're trying to be the most fair and judicious with crowning a champion it's not the way to go, but the drama of sudden death and the theater that we had Sunday night can't be beat IMO. http://www.geoffshackelford.com/homepage/2017/4/11/one-little-2017-masters-quibble-sudden-death.html
  11. Last night in the Jack series Tom Selleck declared that Jack is the GOAT...I did say it's a coin flip but I'm going to have to give the edge to whatever this guy says.
  12. I've never said he had to get to 18 to be the GOAT...I'm just saying that if he did...or the 20-24 I think he could have won, this wouldn't even be much of debate. As their two careers sit today, I think it's a coin flip of a debate. No more pointless than trying to speculate how the greats of Jack's era would have stacked up in Tiger's fields. It's all just opinions with no provable answer.
  13. IMO it has everything to do with what he didn't accomplish and why this topic is even debatable. Tiger had the talent and should have eclipsed Jack's record....Jack said so himself. IMO one of the reasons he failed to was because of the constant swing changes. There's obviously no way to prove this one way or the other but nothing is going to make me believe he didn't cost himself several majors with his constant tinkering. He was the most talented golfer to probably ever step foot on the earth...how he could conceivably take career altering advice from clowns like Haney and Foley will forever be beyond be.
  14. Thinking about the all time greats that Jack competed against in their primes- Player, Watson, Palmer, Seve, Trevino (combined 35 majors)...and then the next tier down- Casper, Irwin, Floyd, Weiskof, Miller (combined 13 majors) Compared to Tiger's field- the only three that are probably in the conversation for top 20 all time greats are Phil, Ernie, and Vijay (combined 12 majors) and then a bunch of guys who have 1-2 majors. At the top it's not even close between the two eras. Now you can argue that the likes of Watson and Trevino only racked up a bunch of majors because of the weak fields...but again, I think Watson all but winning the '09 Open against Tiger's field blows a bit of a hole in that theory. Great champions are great champions regardless of the era, but the fact is Tiger's fields had a bunch of guys who didn't have the fortitude/hunger/whatever you want to call it to show up when it mattered. Again, no doubt that Tiger's fields were stronger and deeper, but I don't the quality (albeit shallow quality) that Jack competed against should be overlooked. Either way, I think the strength of field argument is overstated here. Jack had the better career and Tiger reached the higher pinnacle.
  15. Most accurate comment in this thread IMO. At age 59 Tom Watson could/should have won a major against Tiger's field. The net differences in fields over the span of 30 years is not as significant as many like to believe. I think Jack competed against ~10 real champions and then a bunch of relatively insignificant guys....Tiger competed against maybe 1-3 real champions and then 100 or so really good players. As for the likes of Tiger vs. Jack GOAT discussion, their careers are apples and oranges. One had a better career while one reached a higher pinnacle. It's Beatles vs. Stones.