sjduffers

I'm thinking "Smashing Hulk" kind of power, for the tee shots. Instead of driving 220-230, I would be 320-330 out there, with my 70% FIR, and have a much better chance of scoring well. Hey, one can dream, right? 😜

An exception to the always advance the ball with a stroke "rule" that I can think of is the practice that some courses have to create a drop zone on the other side of a hazard or penalty area or forced carries, which otherwise could really slow down play, if people are unable to get to the other side safely. I have used them, sometimes with appreciation for the "shortcut". 🙂 As far as always/never I can think of "if you pay with a.penalty stroke for a relief. you always get two clubs, and if you get free relief, you always get one club". Any exception to that one, notwithstanding combining multiple reliefs adding to more than one club?

Ok, thanks. I had forgot that rule reversal. Still, some (high-level) tournaments disallow rangefinders. Wouldn't a person asking for a rangefinder reading (with or without slope enabled), in such tournament still incur a penalty, for effectively asking someone else to do something against the rules? I get it that if the other player does provide the reading, he gets a penalty for using the deemed illegal rangefinder, but what about the guy that asks (or goads) him to do it?

Can I add that we are all assuming here that the use of rangefinders per se is legal in this tournament (meaning, the local rule allowing it is in effect), aren't we? That is the case in most events, but what if it isn't? Isn't the person asking for a laser reading also asking for advice, I mean, a penalty? 😉 I agree with everyone about the use of the slope feature of the rangefinder. No can't do.

Congrats, well done! See? I did take note. 😜. I am not doing very well, either at the home course or away (which is really more or less another home course...): I have lots of birdies, many times 2 or 3 per round, but they are always on the same holes, so that does not help my cause on either spreadsheet.

There is already a local rule that allows dropping in the fairway for a lost ball. But, yes, typically that will not be as good or advantageous as a well hit provisional, so there is no way to justify hitting the provisional as a valid choice for Stroke and Distance relief for the original ball found and unplayable. Either go back to the tee, or use the local rule that allows you to drop in the fairway with 2 penalty strokes, then go pick up your provisional which cannot be in play the moment you found the original ball. 😜

75 with only 2 GIR (and some good chipping/putting and 2 birdies): a little bit off from the prediction of 91, lol!

Are you just trolling? The dress codes of these 2 tours (it's called the PGA Tour, not the PGA, by the way) was enforced long before this "merger", which was announced like a minute ago, without all the details being worked out. Things such as what happens to the Tour players now being shafted for having held out, or what happens to the LIV players, as far as rejoining the PGA Tour (or DP World Tour) are not clear yet. Never mind the silly debate of shorts vs long pants.

What a timely post. Just yesterday, I was discussing with my playing partner the possibility of moving up for variety: we can still both play from the Blue tees at our regular course, but the White tees would change the "routine" a bit. I also mentioned moving up to the Red tees and playing with irons only (I think the longest both of us have is a 4 iron), for a different kind of variety. We might just try that next time. But yes, I agree with the article that the forward tees are both too long and stigmatizing, as called ladies or super senior tees, and/or red in color, too often. Good thinking and data collecting by the USGA.

Yes, that's a really bad break for the player having to give the stroke. Considering that in Match Play, the strokes are given/taken by the difference in handicaps, the guy receiving one stroke is not necessarily a 1 index and the other guy scratch. They could be 14 and 15, and in Stroke Play they both would get a stroke on the #1 handicap hole (and many more obviously), but in Match Play, the 14 index gives one stroke to the 15 index and is at a real disadvantage on the first playoff hole in this situation...

Another positive mention for Clicgear (the 4.0 model in my case). After years of using multiple Sun Mountain 3-wheelers and breaking countless wheels at the spokes and even once a frame, I switched to Clicgear, which folds smaller, stays folded and is a bit easier to handle in general, once you've learn the right order of steps to fold and unfold. I couldn't be happier with a push cart (well, unless I added self-propulsion)!

After an Ok drive, I cold shanked a 6 iron, but then hit a great pitch from 50 yards that bounced once and rolled into the hole, for an "easy" birdie. 🙂

I think I am enjoying this series quite a bit, more than I thought I would. I never hated Ian Poulter (even though he can be quite a prick) and I don't hate him any more now. I found he was quite relatable actually, morals about joining LIV aside, but that applies to all of them and even more so Phil and DJ. I found the episode about Joel Dahlmen very interesting. The guy is way more complex than "I am having a good time on the PGA Tour", which is what Pat Perez was before he joined LIV. Overall, I think it's worth a watch, even if it's not earth-shattering or award-worthy.

Kinda like: "I just joined the Gestapo. I am thinking that I could change Adolf's mind in 10 years"? Maybe not quite literally, but close enough. That guy is just completely clueless! SMH.

Who is the audience for this? People that watch the Masters and only that, once a year, even more clueless (about golf) people? In the first episode, they had graphics telling people that a round is 18 holes, that par is expected score, what bogey, birdie and eagle are, etc... Despite all that, I found the series so fat not as dreadful as some said, and the visuals are really good, I thought. I liked the Brooks/Scottie episode as well, but haven't watched further, yet. But, I will.

Don't aspire too much: it means you're old (and retired) and your golf game is going the wrong way: downhill! 😂

Beginning and end of the year are always worst, mostly due to conditions (California is a whole year handicap region). For example, I only played a few rounds this January, and most of that was not even really playable, with so much water and mud everywhere, even on the greens (and hence not counted for handicap). But, at least it felt good to go out and "play".

Rory McIlory Jon Rahm Scottie Scheffler Collin Morikawa Justin Thomas Cameron Smith Max Homa Patrick Cantlay Matthew Fitzpatrick Dustin Johnson Xander Schauffele Tony Finau Will Zalatoris Viktor Hovland Cameron Young

Nobody is saying otherwise. It remains that PR couldn't have identified his ball and be "100% sure", because the ball he pretended to have identified could not have been his. On that basis, he lied. That's the issue, not the fact that he managed to get a drop he didn't really deserve. That's impugning his character, not his performance in the event (which I didn't watch, or cared about) It looks further than that to me on the aerial video, but whatever. It's still a different tree altogether.

Precisely, what I said, only paraphrasing what Brandel Chamblee was saying, with video proof. Sheesh! Fair enough, but how can he be "100% sure" that that is his ball, when in fact, it can't be? It must have been the same brand, model. number, and markings, all verified from 50ft below with binoculars, while probably 3/4 of the ball wasn't even visible from the ground (the hidden face, opposite the viewer, and a partially obstructed view from the palm fronds). That's what I have an issue with. If it had said, I think that may be my ball, or I am 90% sure, or whatever other number, fine. But it can't be 100%, because it wasn't his ball. QED.

Did you miss the frame by frame video analysis by Brandel Chamblee (included a couple of times in this thread, above), which clearly shows that P. Reed was barking at the wrong tree? His ball was virtually certainly in a tree 20 yards behind, yet he was "100% sure" to have identified his ball in the tree where the ball couldn't have been. SMH.

I din't watch the coverage or the aftermath, but caught this tread and the tweet that Brandel Chamblee put out: that frame by frame video analysis is mwah (chef-kiss)! It's unbelievable to me that Patrick Reed would be 100% certain to have identified his ball in another tree (some 20 or 30 yards ahead and in a taller tree)! Laughable, really. P Reed, the cheater. QED.

Wrong thread! 🙂 We are in 2023 now, you know... Unless you want to complete the challenge over whatever number of years it takes, lol. I would understand that too.

Super! Too bad you couldn't see the ball go in the hole. But in the end, it doesn't matter. You've got a story to tell: my ball was nowhere to be found until my buddy looked in the hole... and there it was!

Finau's caddy cleaned Tony's ball after he marked it (a club length away), starting around 2:30 in the video. You can't clean a ball when marking it unless on the green. Correct? The rest of the procedure looks ok to me.