Clambake

Quote: Originally Posted by jsgolfer Making my second trip to San Diego in mid-April. I have already played both Torrey Pines Golf Courses, Morgan Run and Salt Creek. Looking for some different courses to play. Have had several people tell me to playThe Crossings at Carlsbad and Aviara. Cross Creek gets good reviews as well, are there any others I should look at? I also have the capability to get on these private courses? Anyone played any of these? The Country Club of Rancho Bernardo ($110 -$120) De Anza Country Club ($110) Pauma Valley Country Club ($125) St. Mark Golf Club ($40) StoneRidge Country Club ($100) Starting with your list of the private courses, I've played them all, and the only one on that list I'd bother with is Pauma Valley, however I still wouldn't suggest it. The front nine is pretty boring, but the back nine is a very nice layout with interesting holes. The rest of the clubs you mention are really "D List" places, and there are much better public course options at better prices. Regarding some of the other suggestions, I'll offer my opinions, and they come from the viewpoint that you're visiting our lovely area and want golf experiences that will be more memorable. The Crossings is NOT a high end course; it is a strange layout on a difficult piece of property that was a compromise of 20+ years of legal wrangling. Horrible pace of play, especially once you hit the back nine. Cottonwood is a dump; avoid at all costs. Vineyard isn't bad, but does play very slow and it seems no one who plays there ever fixes ball marks; for us locals it isn't bad to try occasionally, but I wouldn't recommend it to a visitor. Rancho Bernardo Inn is hit or miss; the layout is OK and is usually in good shape, but it generally overpriced. La Costa is way, way, overpriced for what you get; the Champions course is the better layout, but they charge a lot for the place and conditioning is often spotty. Cross Creek is a long way out of the way, and isn't special enough for me to recommend it to a visitor. Balboa is a fun little muni with a lot of history, and can be fun to play if it isn't too crowded. Conditions are often so-so and there isn't anything about the course that will really stand out to a visitor. But of all of the above, I feel there are much better choices, especially for a visitor to SD. Since you've played both Torrey courses and are looking for something a bit different, here are my suggestions (in no particular order): Barona : Get the casino card (can be done on line or when you hit the pro shop) and take advantage of their very generous twilight rate which starts at 11am and is only $64 mid week. Best bang for the buck in the county. The setting is lovely, tucked in a valley about 30 minutes east of downtown, without any houses or anything. Fairly open off the tee, but scoring well requires good shot placement due to the challenging green complexes and bunkering. I consider Barona a "must play". Coronado : The course isn't tough or filled with uniquely interested holes, but the setting is great and it can be the quintessential San Diego golf experience (other than Torrey). It is usually in pretty good condition, and the views as you play along the bay and of the Hotel Del are a blast, especially the last half dozen holes. Pretty cheap; just check their website calendar to see if they have any events planned first, otherwise you can usually walk on pretty easily. Not the most interesting golf, but the whole experience is fun. Play it in the morning, then have lunch at the Hotel Del and enjoy the afternoon wandering Coronado. Maderas : High end facility with great service, an interesting layout, lovely views, and in great condition. It was originally built as high-end private club and it still feels like one. It is a tough challenge, but you'll enjoy it very much as all the holes have a lot of variety and offer strategic options. Look on GolfNow for the best deals; mid-week you should find deals in the $120 range. Aviara : Another high end place with outstanding service. If you're visiting mid-April it will only be a couple weeks after the Kia LPGA tourney there, so the course will be in great shape. It's fun to play the "Kia Tees" which are a mix of blue, white, and reds that the LPGA plays on Sunday. Aviara is very pricey at about $250 and deals are pretty non-existent, but go for twilight at about $165. It still is expensive, but even at that price point it is a good value, especially right after the LPGA tournament. Pechanga : About 45 minutes north of San Diego in Temecula, The Journey at Pechanga is a dramatic course with amazing elevation changes, swooping up and down the mountain. Some people hate the layout, but most love it, except perhaps for the bizarre valley in the middle of the 18th green. But the course is unforgettable. Golf Club of California : A private club that has struggled financially and opened up for outside play, located in Fallbrook about 40 minutes north of San Diego. Nice layout, good challenge, good conditions, and a great bargain. Look on GolfNow for the best deals, which are typically around $45-65 depending on time of day and general demand. One of the best values in the county. Rams Hill : This is a new wild card I'd add into the mix if you're up for a bit of a drive as it is located in Borrego Springs about 90 minutes or so east of San Diego. Unlike the De Anza CC in Borrego, Rams Hill is a fantastic layout that just reopened after being closed for years, and it is without a doubt the best conditioned course I've ever played. Great Fazio design, uncrowded, perfect conditioning....it is worth the drive, and the scenery in the drive is great as well. Stop in Julian on the drive back and enjoy some pie. Steele Canyon : Three nines located southeast of San Diego, it offers a good test of golf with a lot of interesting holes. Cost is very reasonable. The service level and conditioning aren't as good as you'll find at Maderas or Pechanga, but it shares a slightly similar feel as it is a course that is designed into the undulating hills and canyons. Good solid public track. Hope this helps, and enjoy your trip. Feel free to PM me if you'd like more details on any of the courses, or if you're looking for a playing partner when here!

Torrance is completely off base and incorrect. As everyone knows, the proper term for Nick is "Sir A**hole". Torrance needs to show the proper respect the Queen has bestowed upon him.

Yes, they're very legit. They operate a couple stores in San Diego as well as online sales, and are knowledgeable and helpful.

Pro A does not have a case against the city and would only be wasting his money litigating. There are several tests to examine on this: does the city have the right to allow another pro at this facility? Is the city materially interfering with the Pro's contractual rights at th facility? How could such interference be measured to determined if he has incurred damages? On the first test, the city clearly has the right to allow another pro at the facility under the non-exclusive rights clause. That is unambiguous. The fact that such a clause is explicitly defined in the contract would also be indicative of the city's expectation do do something like this, so Pro A could not claim that this was not intended in the contract. Omissions in contracts can sometimes be as important as what is covered, and in this case there is no omission that would be used to show lack of intent. Material interference would be a high bar to prove. Simply having another pro present is not materially interfering with Pro A's business. If the city did things like slashing the operating hours of the range, prevent him fron advertising, or some other significant adverse action, that could be material as it is fundamentally damaging his ability to conduct his business. Competition per se is not a materially adverse condition, and the fact that there are no doubt numerous teaching pros operating in the community will support that position, as Pro A was already able to establish and grow his business in the presence of that broader competition. The final part would be trying to show that he is a damaged party and the city's actions were the cause of those damages. Even if the above issues about exclusivity and material interference were shown to be in his favor, he needs to show those were the causal impacts of his damaged business. If his business dropped by 50% or more, a causal relationship would be easier to demonstrate. But with only a 15% drop this would be harder to show, the defendants would likely pull out all manner of statistics and data showing the decline of goffers, decrease in rounds, etc. They would likely subpoena his students as well to determine if they were dropping out because of his instruction or other factors. The litigation would be messy, with a small likelihood of success. Were he my client, I would recommend that instead of pursuing a litigious approach with the city and an antagonistic approach with the competing pro, he would be much better off seeking a strategic partnership with the other pro. Together they could pursue advertising strategies that might be otherwise unaffordable, or conduct clinics together, or other business activities that would be mutually beneficial.

Erik, don't discount an app as crap just because it is free. There are a lot of ways to monetize a free app, and many will make far more money for the developer than if they sold the app. For example, Angry Birds is free but a hidden part of that app does geo tracking and sends data back on everywhere your cell phone has gone, tied to the mobile number. Data miners pay a lot for this type of info, and the Angry Bird developers have made a lot of money even without having to sell extra levels and features to the user. Other free apps have hidden pieces that track who you call, where you go, where you stop, what you browse, etc. All very valuable info and very profitable for the developer. Although Game Golf costs money, I'll bet they are also monetizing the data they get from each user as well, and it wouldn't surprise me if the hardware is break even for them but data is where their profit goes. By having the account, they know who you are, how well you play golf, where you golf, and who some of your friends are. Pretty valuable marketing data!

You mean the first derivative of play?

Except you've got it backwards. TW started on the 10th hole on Saturday, and was barely hanging on until his 9th hole of the day, #18, when he splashed his second shot. From then on he was only going through the motions. I was there, and his body language and demeanor were not those of someone grinding to make the cut. After he bogeyed #3 (his 12th hole of the day) he totally looked like someone who couldn't wait to get out of town.

I disagree with the concept to abolish the political parties. While party partisanship appears to be a major problem right now, I feel that is actually a smokescreen. In fact, it is possible that strong political parties are needed now more than ever, an idea I'll explain a little further down. The party system historically has worked as a buffer against extreme ideals and has actually helped elective offices remain more balanced than more dissimilar. Without a party system, it is highly more possible that candidates with strong, extremist viewpoints could get elected. At the root of this was funding - it has been nearly impossible for a candidate to secure office without the backing of his or her party. With a majority of party finances being derived from donors and sources that are somewhat more centrist, no political party would be in a position to totally disenfranchise their base by swaying too far from a reasonable position. However, one thing has significantly distorted this - the Super PACs. With vast sums of political funding now driven by Super PACs, fringe candidates are more easily able to mount viable campaigns without the express approval and support of their party. People who were once not electable are now viable candidates, and they are occasionally elected now and are able to buck their party's agenda. Another aggravating factor is how the use of media has shifted over the last decade or so and how that is shaping the electability of candidates. At one time, the various media outlets were also somewhat more centrist in their approach. There were certainly biases present in reporting, but they were much more subtle than what we see today. With news organizations themselves representing positions far more left or right than previously, they shape the viewer or reader's perspectives on the candidates far more than before. At the same time, the voting populace has themselves shifted further away from a population that may actually do some research and create an informed opinion; it is now a world of tweets and soundbites the defines what directions a voter heads. I recall from college Poly Sci that "An informed and intelligent electorate is essential for a functional democracy". The political parties used to help support that vision by having a platform that people could understand. Campaign funding was consistent with that perception, and helped position candidates who represented views that would reflect that vision but yet be sufficient middle-of-the-road so as to be electable. And the media reasonably presented those opinions to the public to make a choice. However, we largely have an electorate now that is neither informed nor intelligent (at least on the fundamental issues and true needs). With the terribly skewed Super PAC-based funding and the shifts in relatively balanced media coverage, we now have a system where the loudest candidate voice gets the most sound bites and is packaged and marketed in ways we never saw a couple decades ago. The extremists now have a platform, and they have found the self-perpetuating cycle where the louder they yell the more funding they can generate. Chris Anderson's book "The Long Tail" outlined a business phenomena where smaller demographic segments offered great opportunities through technology-infused marketing focus, and this same phenomena can now be seen in our political spectrum. The "long tail" demographics in the electorate have power unlike they ever had before. Without the two main political parties providing some buffer in the system, it is likely this problem will get worse and worse.

I've run into Muira's at a number of golf shops, so I was curious and looked up their authorized dealers on their website and it shows a very different picture that what you describe. In California alone they show 42 authorized dealers all over the state. In NY they show 7 dealers, not all near the City, including the Albany area and Rochester. 15 dealers in Florida. And so on. They don't seem to be nearly as exclusive as the image you're trying to paint.

It already has. There have been several 58s shot on professional golf tours. Jason Bohn did it on the Canadian Tour and Ryo Ishikawa on the Japanese Tour. Shigeki Maruyama shot one in a US Open qualifier.

When used in the negative form, such as "I did not use to play blades, but now I do.".

?? The stamping says "Cameron" and the usual Scotty 3 dots.

OP, have you considered looking for the best of both worlds where you can use your ME experience and training in the golf industry instead? Here's an example of a current open Callaway position: https://rn22.ultipro.com/cal1002/JobBoard/JobDetails.aspx?__ID=*3B3F3BCA48E45860 Starting at the bottom at a golf equipment company is likely a much lesser hit to the finances and could be a very rewarding and enjoyable career option compared to slugging it out against the thousands of people trying to be a club pro somewhere. Most of them probably have a better jump on those jobs than you will since the they've been playing high level golf their whole life and have probably been interning or working at a golf course since they were 12. But you have something most of them will never have - a good education in a professional field that offers far more options (and nearly all of them would be far more lucrative).

Typical UK Links Course: Typical US Manicured Course: Both are lovely in different ways. And I wouldn't mind "playing" either one.

Not sure you understand the concept of "percentage". 0.33% would be 3 people out of a 1000, not 1 in 3

I have no problem if TM comes out with a BunnyBalz product line, and I have no problem if people want to play golf with a Hammer (pow!), double sided chipper, and long putter attached to their forehead. To enjoy playing basketball, do you have to play it with a specified ball, a hoop exactly at 10 feet and a court with exact dimensions, and with 5 people on a team playing with a shot clock? To play football, do you have to use a 100 yard long field with 11 men on a side, playing exact specified positions, running plays, and tackling in exact accordance with a 20 pound rule manual? No...one can grab a non-regulation ball and find any spot of ground and make up a game that is fun, like playing "horse" or 1:1 basketball, or flag or touch football. Sports need to be accessible, and allowing people to pick up the game with instruments that can be handled by them - such as a smaller football or basketball and lower height basket for juniors - and then play with those in a format that is enjoyable and hooks them is something that needs to be done by any sport, including golf. But if you want to compete, there need to be the strict rules and regulations just like any sport, detailing what equipment and forms of play are not accessible. Golf seems to be the only sport that works overtime to dictate that everyone play by the exact same rules and equipment no matter where they are in the competition hierarchy, and that is intimidating to many who wish to take up the game. I say more power to TM, and I hope they also work with places that will create small golf environments like 3, 6, or 9 hole "courses" where people can go play with whatever they want and get hooked on the challenge of trying to knock a little ball a long distance into a little hole. Do that and the golf will be a healthy sport and grow.

Huh??? This makes zero sense. The name is "Carlsbad Golf Center" located in the city of Carlsbad, CA. There is no "Carl". And it isn't a he...it's owned by a woman named Susan Roll. And yes, they are legit. They're an award winning shop with excellent clubfitting and do have an e-commerce part of their business.

Just saw the replay after his finish. In his TV interview right after leaving the scoring room, Tiger said (the quote is as close as I can remember it) " I looked at the drop area but it was into the grain so it was a tough shot. So instead I went back to where I was but went 2 yards farther back to take two yards off the shot ". That sounds like he knew where he was and deliberately played from a different spot.

I think maybe he meant his swing was "incontinent" - his shots keep leaking right.

Nah, it can't be. The question is about "Least Favorite Player ". He's no player.

Wow, man, try to get a little sense of humor. This isn't the Brain Surgery Forum.

Yes there are, but we've been informed you're not cleared to have access to them. Sorry.

Interesting, but I wonder why the writer felt the need to stick in such slams in the story. "..arouse white men..."? "...lilting crackerism"? Was that really necessary?

Logman, I've followed a number of threads where you cover all your swing theories, and I'm really getting an appreciation for what you're saying and how it applies to the golf swing. I think I've finally figured out there is a lot of value in what you're saying. I've determined that if I take all your concepts and ideas and then do the exact OPPOSITE, I'll be a really good golfer. Thanks for all your guidance - it's going to be a big help!

I told my wife " I am getting a new custom putter. It won't be cheap, and normally I value your opinion but on golf equipment you simply cannot grasp the importance or value of this. Golf is very important to me, and if you love me you'll understand why getting this putter is important to me. In the long time over our marriage, the money spent on this putter is trivial, but my peace of mind should be worth something to you. You may object, but I don't care. Get over it. Oh, and by the way, yes those pants do make you look fat ." In my mind. Out loud, I said " Pleeease? Oh please, please, please may I spend a little of our hard earned money on this putter? Oh, and by the way those pants look fantastic! Have you lost weight?" I really like my new putter.