• Announcements

    • iacas

      Introducing TST "Clubs!"   08/28/2017

      No, we're not getting into the equipment business, but we do have "clubs" here on TST now. Groups. Check them out here:

BaconNEggs

Established Member
  • Content count

    45
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

7 Sandbagger

About BaconNEggs

  • Rank
    Established Member

Personal Information

  • Your Location
    Boston, MA

Your Golf Game

  • Handedness
    Righty

Recent Profile Visitors

462 profile views
  1. The Importance of a Trouble Shot

    Based on the elevation change (which is hard to discern how much there is from the photo), probably a 6 or 7i and try to draw it. I think if you are a creative player, these types of shots are very fun and while I don't like putting myself in these situations, I really enjoy trying to get out and making a shot of it. Nothing is sadder than pitching out 15 yards sideways into the fairway.
  2. 40 Putts per Round, Average of 96 (Dave Pelz)?

    Yup. If you were to go out to a muni that has a tough green and watch the average weekend hacker on that hole, I would bet you'd see a scary number of four putts... and I bet a lot of them would get recorded as three putts.
  3. The President just shot 73 at

    Many playing partners have said he takes a lot of the usual weekend hacker liberties-- breakfast balls, lie improvements, etc. He's still a pretty good golfer, though. I think Ernie Els said he thought he would be a high single digit handicapper if he played legit.
  4. 40 Putts per Round, Average of 96 (Dave Pelz)?

    It wouldn't surprise me to be in the upper 30s, easily. 40 does sound a little bit high for an average. I play with a couple guys who typically shoot in the high 90s and low 100s, so higher than the 96 golfer mentioned in the thread-- but 40+ putts doesn't sound unusual or outlandish for them. One putts are rare, three putts are common, and four putts definitely happen, probably more often than you would think... especially if these guys are kept honest and actually putt out. If you google "average 40 putts" or something along those lines, you'll find no shortage of people who profess to average 40 putts in a round, and their scores are lower than you might think (if you believe them).
  5. Is golf more mental or physical?

    Since course management seems so relevant, take Frisbee/disc golf as an example. You face many of the same considerations as a golf course, minus things like lie and water hazards. But the skill hurdle is that much lower, assuming you're good enough to consistently throw a Frisbee. And assuming you are good enough to do that, you would almost never accidentally throw the Frisbee directly at the target you're trying to avoid (e.g. the woods). Doesn't matter how nervous you are. Doesn't matter how frustrated or upset you are. Why? Because you are physically good enough / consistent enough to throw the Frisbee at the target you want, regardless of your mental state. Golf is like that, but on steroids. The skills are just that much more difficult to master.
  6. Is golf more mental or physical?

    Why do you have negative thoughts? Because you aren't (physically) that good of a golfer, your swing is not consistent enough, and you are not confident in your ability to hit a good shot. I don't mean any offense there. And people are notoriously untrustworthy when recalling events. I would bet that for every time you have a "negative thought" and hit a bad shot (relative to your average shot), there are times you have a "negative thought" and hit an average or good shot. You just don't remember them, or you place an outsized significance on the times you hit a bad shot. I totally get it. If you have water on the right side, it's not uncommon to think don't slice and hit the water, and yet invariably that's what happens. In this hypothetical, maybe a golfer is probably swinging away from the water (out to in) in an effort to avoid it (despite that being the opposite swingpath you'd want), cutting across the ball, and slicing it. Here's the thing: if your swing was rock-solid and repeatable (physically), and you knew with 95% certainty that you could hit the shot you wanted to hit (maybe a draw that starts center and goes left), that mental error manifesting itself in an out to in swingpath and unwanted slice wouldn't happen. You're not unique; you're typical. Your physical game simply is not good enough, and mental errors manifest themselves into physical errors. And yes, you could be mentally better, and without that mental error that pops up you might avoid the water on the right more often, but at the end of the day the mistake you and others like Runnin continue to make is to highlight these one-off examples where mental errors cause an extra stroke or two and then extrapolate that to mean they are more important than the physical game. Think about it. You're a 15 index. You might be able to shave 3 or 4 strokes a round (generous IMO) if your mental game were better. But you're still going to make purely physical mistakes that result in the other 10-15 shots above par that you normally hit. Which would you rather have: Tiger Woods' swing from 2000 (physical) and your current mental game, or your current swing and Tiger Woods' 2000 mental game? If you take the latter, again, you might shave off a small handful of strokes from your current index. If you took the former, you'd instantly be a scratch golfer. Would you even worry about that water on the right if you knew you could hit 20 other tee shots of varying shapes and distances so consistently? No! It's not unsolvable, people just don't want to listen. They just want to put forth their arguments and hold their ground, regardless of the counter-argument. Golf, like every single sport, is predominantly physical. There is not a single sport out there where the "mental game" is more important to an individual's performance. It's just not a thing! Sports are physical! Yes, the mental game matters. Mental errors might cause you to make a bad shot making decision. Mental errors might be the difference between shooting a 79 or 80. But they will not be the difference between shooting a 79 and a 95. A 25 handicapper is not going to break 80 because his mental game is strong. A scratch golfer won't shoot 95 because of a poor mental state.
  7. Is golf more mental or physical?

    The better you are physically, the less likely mental issues will affect you. Be the Buddha of unconscious competence. If your physical game is good enough that it's essentially second nature, cognitive errors won't really manifest themselves in bad shots. If you were as consistent as a machine, your emotional state wouldn't matter. The mental game would be irrelevant. Now think about the 25 handicapper. He's more likely to hit bad shots, even in a good mental state. And those bad shots are more likely to negatively affect his confidence (rightfully so), which might increase the odds even more of a bad shot. The great mental player won't let it affect him, but he's still a 25 handicap, he's still likely to hit bad shots. Just slightly less so. Both of those golfers need to get better physically to make significant improvements. All things equal, the stronger mental player will be better. But a weak mental player who is excellent physically- machine like consistency- will beat a weak physical player who is rock solid emotionally. The physical is far more important.
  8. Is golf more mental or physical?

    Let me preface this by saying that if you want to get into semantics, anything physical we do is mentally driven-- subconsciously or consciously-- and for the purposes of this debate, that's not what I mean when I talk about the mental aspect. That would be an exercise in futility. That being said... It's mostly physical, like all sports. They're physical by definition (sports (n): an activity involving physical exertion and skill). In any sport, even those that don't necessarily require obvious athleticism such as bowling or billiards, they're still by far predominantly physical, just in a more narrow application. And like all sports, there is a mental aspect to it. Both in terms of strategy and in terms of execution. Execution is where the mental affects the physical. Things like concentration/focus, visualization, nerves, etc. The mental aspect, like the physical, will differ from player to player. And it differs from sport to sport. I tend to think any stationary sports, or stationary aspects of sports, involve the most mental skill in that you actually have time to consciously think about what you are going to do-- a penalty kick in soccer, a shot in golf, a free throw in basketball-- and it allows for mental errors to creep in. Whereas in dynamic sports or actions, you tend to be doing things on a reactionary or subconscious level. But regardless, it's still physical ability that dictates the vast majority of how you will perform, barring weird outliers like someone with extreme anxiety issues or something where their physical abilities are overwhelmed by mental issues.
  9. 2017 Tour Championship

    Looks like Thomas is probably a lock for POTY now.
  10. Born with Clubface Control

    I hit a low draw that started left and ended up a little less than 20 yards left of target with extremely strong grip. It felt like I had to fight off my clubface releasing closed just to avoid a hard trap draw. With a weak grip I hit a slight push fade that started just right of target and finished about 10 yards right. It was an eye opening experience in that it got me to focus so much more on my grip, hands, and wrists. Over the last week, I've hit about 400 balls really focusing on my clubface control. For one thing, I understand the ball flight laws, but in practice I never realized how much slight-- previously unconscious-- movements that might close or open the club face can dramatically alter the shot result. I know I typically hit draws despite not wanting to, but I just didn't think too hard about what was happening, at least in my hands. I realized I have a tendency when I take my normal grip (top hand neutral, bottom hand slightly strong) to have the clubface at impact slightly closed relative to address, probably only a few degrees By having my clubface a few degrees open to the line I want my ball to start on, I was able to actually do what I was intending to do. By changing my grip a little (moving the bottom hand weaker) and feeling like I held off release, I could have a square clubface at address and impact, but I was less consistent, and it definitely felt like I was fighting my swing a little. It's a great topic. I was a good hitter in baseball but that just seems so much easier, the tolerance for error is much higher. But the analogy has made me be more aware in general of the clubface.
  11. 2017 Tour Championship

    I've liked the playoffs this year. I like the prospect of Casey winning now, and if he has a bad day there's still a good horse race behind him for an entertaining finish. Had no idea the last and only time he won on the tour was 2009. It would be a nice feather in his cap 8 years later.
  12. LPGA major Evian shortened to 54 Holes

    Yeah, I didn't see many shots reach the back tier of the green. I'm curious what the scoring average was on it, I was seeing more 5s and 6s than 4s. Is there any precedent for just cancelling a partially played round like that? I know it's not all that unusual for tournaments to be shortened to 54 holes, but I have no idea if it's really unusual to cancel out a round that had started like that.
  13. Why? I'll assume you're familiar with logical fallacies and spare explaining why this isn't a legitimate argument. I don't remember Jack complaining when he was outdriving most of his fellow competitors in the 60s and 70s.
  14. Lost the love

    Take a break. It's easy to get tired or bored of something, even something you really enjoy. After a few weeks/months, you may feel the fire again and want to play. You may not. If you don't, I'd still encourage you to try it out anyways and see how you feel after. For me, after extended breaks (winter) I usually don't feel that passionate about playing. But once I force myself to get out there, it comes right back without fail.
  15. I had a pair of Allen Edmonds that were rock solid, but never truly comfortable. I gave them to my brother after two years, they were still in good shape and I expect would last quite a bit longer if cared for. I replaced them with spikeless Pumas Ignites this summer. I really like the look of them, to the point where I will wear them around in place of my regular sneakers (also Pumas). However, the inside of the toe box on my right foot (rear foot) has worn down substantially. It won't be long before I'll have an exposed toe! The AE showed wear in the same area, but like I said those were rock solid, they just needed to be polished. Don't know if it's a swing issue, never ran into the problem with other shoes. Would like to spend up on some nice Eccos or similar, but a little alarmed at how fast the Pumas degraded. Don't want to spend $150-250 on shoes that will only last a season.