Shorty

That’s true. They’ve quite probably done him a favour in a roundabout way.

The thing about Hideki is s that even even if accepted, say, 400million, that could end up COSTING him money. That money is already there for him over the next decade or so with endorsements etc. which he wouldn’t want to lose.

Yes- I seem to have confused myself here! Thanks Dave. Unless the ball enters from a tiny peninsula, there would generally be a spot within 2 club lengths that is not closer to the hole.

You drop at point of entry into the penalty area. Point of entry is the long and short of it.

Never denied that.

Because at your level of golf it's like thinking that a shaft change is going to help you move the ball from left to right or right to left like Bubba Watson. Don't fall into the trap of thinking that golf is about golf equipment. Look at the WITB videos of the top players on Youtube. The majority of them have little or no interest in the shafts they use. They pretty much know they work, don't change them much and in many cases have to look at the shafts to be able to tell with certainty what they are.

If you are of average height and build, with average clubhead speed, and you somehow think that Dynamic Gold 300 shafts - probably the most popular/common shafts for decades - are an issue for you, you might need to look elsewhere. You have a swing/impact issue. Not a shaft issue, in my opinion. The other thing is that not all the greens you play on are necessarily amenable to low shots holding them - you have to be able to hit it high unless they are soft. Yours is simply a garden variety version of why certain players can and can not win at Augusta. Equipment isn't going to drastically alter the characteristics of your ball flight if certain fundamentals are not in place.

I had a pair of Ecco "World Class" shoes with a leather sole that retailed for $Aus 500. I bought them a tan Ecco outlet for a fraction of that and they lasted about 6 months. BUT NOTE - Just remember that golf shoes will almost always come with at leasrt a 12 month warranty. If after 9 months or so a pair develops a fault, you will get a replacement pair. It's easy to forget that with shoes that look worn if they're used a couple of times a week in bad conditions.

The most annoying thing about his story was that when he made up this BS 2.6 index crap, he was on all these TV shows and did interviews where the people talking to him essentially thought he was only 2 shots a round worse than a pro. I mean just think...only 2 shots a round worse than Jon Rahm. Amazing. I don't think he broke 90 in any of the "tournaments" he played in when he claimed to be off 6 or something. But don't let the facts get in the way of a good story.

Re: pre-shot routines Surely the point is that all good players have a consistent pre-shot routine. Not that it's the way to make you a good player. It does not imply that anyone who has a consistent pre-shot routine is a good player. Not everyone who smokes a packet of cigarettes a day gets smoking induced lung cancer. But all people who do contract smoking induced lung cancer are smokers.

This is a resort golf course. One of the most important aspects of golf course design in a location like this is to remember that 99.999999 percent of rounds are played by amateurs and holidaymakers. If you make the tail wag the dog, no-one would want to play there. Especially in the wind. TV flattens the course out and the tournament has its own identity. It's about the location and the elevation changes.

It is very important that you do everything in your power to diminish the achievements of these players, especially on a course that plays easy for them. Matt Jones played the final 36 in 23 under. If you placed your ball 10 feet from each hole in regulation he'd probably have you by 15 shots.

I can't really see how Rahm won't win this.

I'm pretty sure he moved up about 20 places. That's a move. You were going backwards if you didn't shoot 6 under yesterday. Imagine teeing up on the first tee in the final round in the final group knowing that 65 won't guarantee a win.

My 2c worth: If you're going to do that thing where you start your address with your feet and legs together and then move them, that is usually done as a way of getting the ball position correct for your front foot, just inside your heel for most shots. Then you move your back foot back an appropriate distance. More than one way to do things, obviously, but if you're going to have a deliberate routine, you might ask yourself what it is actually achieving. If you are going to be deliberate about your setup, you may as well have that deliberation working in your favour to get your ball position right.

I used to play this on paper about 30 years ago with friends. You get pretty good at it when you refine your strategy. It's amazing how often you get the word before the 5th try.

It's as simple as that. The perception is that they're "the best" for whatever reason/s and that makes them easier to sell by thieves and more desirable to buyers. Especially at a bargain price. Objectivity has nothing to do with it. Everyone knows that there are dozens of putters that are equally "great" and in any case it comes down to what suits you. It would be like someone thinking that Rolex watches are "the best". You cannot buy a steel sports Rolex at an authorised dealer. Saying that they are "mid tier" does not make them less desirable. Telling someone that a "better" and even more prestigious watch can be had for half the price of the secondary market Rolex selling at 3 x RRP is pointless. Even people who know nothing about the subject recognise the brand. Value retention is also important. You will have no trouble selling legitimately your sourced Cameron putter without taking a bath on price.

I think the (very old) discussion is about actual golf, not video games.

25 million Australians share your viewpoint. What really sucked was that the pathetic, sycophantic Tennis Australia leadership came up with this BS "robust" process where he was given an exemption based on a supposedly blind evaluation by two bodies. That caused instant outrage earlier yesterday. But of course, when he arrived last night it was Border Security saying "Er.... hang on mate. You're not vaccinated and you have no proof of a legitimate reason for entry. So you can F right off". Great stuff.

The above article is from August 2020.

There is probably less technology in 3 (and other fairway) woods than any other club. If you find one that feels right for you, hang on to it. The only thing that I could suggest is that some, like some of the Tour Edge Exotics ones have sole shapes that can help you in the rough and help stop you hitting them too fat. Clubs like the TaylorMade RBZ 3 wood and even the Callaway Steelhead from a VERY long time ago are popular amongst a lot of players. Even things like TaylorMade R7 from 15 years ago are great performers. But it's different for everyone. Just be mindful that a lot of newer fairway woods might have the same colours and names as their latest driver counterparts, but the technology might be identical to that company's 10 year old offerings because there isn't a lot you can do with a 3, 4 or 5 wood technology wise. It comes down to what you like the look of and quite probably a shaft that matches your needs.

You might want to rethink this because it doesn't make sense. Saying you want to avoid wedge play and minimise the effects of poor putting by hitting greens more in regulation more frequently doesn't hold up to even the most minimal amount of scrutiny. It would be a bit like saying you want to play baseball but need to hit home runs more often because you aren't too quick between bases. Your scores will get better because your wedge game and putting improve. As your general game improves you'll hit more greens in regulation. You need to learn to hit a driver. Carrying 8 clubs won't kill you. And-----hitting greens in regulation is not a measure of anything if they're par 4s that are really par 3s or par 5s that are really par 4s. One of the biggest things that will hold you back is thinking that you don't need a driver. You will need one when you start playing courses with decent length holes.

Golf myth # 325: "3 wood is more accurate than driver." People who fear inaccuracy with their driver are almost certainly going to be just as bad with their 3 wood. You have a much better chance of topping or mishitting a 3 wood than a driver. Pros hit 3 woods bacause they run out of fairway with driver, not because they are more accurate. If the average golfer could hit a 3 wood straighter than a driver, he/she'd be better off ditching the driver 100% of the time.

The props and set department typed in "Golf Leaderboard" into Google Images and saw this.

That's a pretty broad brush you're painting with!!