Ty_Webb

I think Rose might have the most zeroed out putting stroke of anyone out there, although as golfing superpowers go that would be one of the most useless.

I've been watching golf for 35 years and I've seen my fair share of exciting events, but I cannot recall ever watching so much up and down in the fortunes of one player in one round of golf. How good the good shots were and how bad the bad shots were and how he was leading, then not, then leading again, then way clear, then tied, then behind, then leading, then in a playoff, then winning. Heck I aged just watching it on the TV - Rory must have gone through some stuff out there. Just incredible. Consider that Rory had two double bogeys, three bogeys, six birdies, and Rose made only 4 pars, 4 bogeys, and 10 birdies. 10! Round that place? Mind officially blown.

Hole in one is nice, but those low rounds stick in my memory better. I have two holes in one (and a third on a pitch and putt course which I count as a half). I've shot in the 60s three times in the last 10 years or so and I remember each one pretty well. I'd take the low round.

It's a one time thing I think - not something you're saying you're going to play exclusively forever...

The former. The latter sounds like an awful lot of not particularly interesting shots to me. The par 3 course could be something like the new par 3 course at Bandon - I'd love to play that.

Got it - so you pick your favorite and then Jayson picks his favorite of those remaining and then Tyson goes twice, then Jayson and finally you? Or something like that anyway Are you doing a weekly release schedule?

What's a snake draft? I, like ChetlovesMer am looking forward to this one. Good drills and bad ones sounds interesting and informative.

I listened to the first one. It's interesting to hear you guys talk about this stuff. This one seemed to be aimed more at instructors than pupils. I'd love to hear one that's about something like how to be a good student or what sort of questions should students be asking in lessons. Aside from anything else there are a lot more people taking lessons than giving them so you'll reach a broader audience that way. As to the how to handle shorter lessons, it seems that you'd have to block off the longest possible lesson time and then cut them short as you can. That means more time twiddling your thumbs and less time teaching though unless you have people on standby, but I can't imagine that ever happens.

Article says it's flu-like, but 42% mortality rate or something like that - she may have just thought she had the flu and needed to beat it. Whole thing is pretty horrifying. His stomach was empty, but he wasn't dehydrated. I'm amazed they didn't have any in home help. They can't have been short of funds.

I am not sure that's the announcers - that's more the producers. It's like the "oh and we're going to cut over to Joe Schmoe here who has a 90 foot putt for eagle on 7. He's +12 for the tournament, let's see what happens", gee I wonder. But they do cut around and show the putts that go in or the shots that go close. One of my favorite announcers is Ken Brown. He played to a high standard and he's quite engaging too. Good combination. He is always talking about how difficult a shot the guy is about to play is. Player has a chip over a ridge and he'll say something along the lines of "this is such a difficult shot - if he can get this within 15 feet of the hole he's doing very well". Then they chip it to a foot and he starts gushing. That's almost the opposite. But it does add some excitement, especially if you don't know how hard the shot is, which, let's face it, is pretty tough to tell on television. There are though definitely some (Miller was pretty "good" at this) who will create unreasonable expectations. Like "he'll be pretty upset if he doesn't get this inside 10 feet" from 100 yards away. On a somewhat separate note, that's why I always quite enjoyed it when they showed every shot Tiger hit. Gave you a much better idea of how the game is actually played. You could watch him some days and he'd do literally nothing spectacular all day, but you add it up and he's shot 67 and you question how he did it. Well, he did it by hitting almost all the greens, making birdies on the par 5s and holing a couple of 8 foot putts on the better approach shots.

I used to find commentators really obnoxious like this, then I watched one of the online streams of the Masters (I think it was amen corner) that had someone commentating on it, but they were literally just stating the name of the player about to hit and their score and other drab stuff. It was so bland I couldn't watch it. Worse than nothing, but I did want to know some of the stuff they were talking about, which is something of a catch-22. I did realize that the commentary team have a pretty rough time of it and do a hard job and some of them do it better than you might realize.

This is pretty interesting. I don't have a Stack radar so I can't use the app, but given what they say it should be fairly easy to come up with some kind of proxy to it if I spend an hour with a trackman. Just note what ball speed gives what distances and plot it. It's presumably not directly linear, but if you hit 50 shots between 30 and 100 yards, you'll have enough to pin down most yardages in that window (yards vs ball speed). Then rather than trying to match distances, just try to match ball speeds with whatever radar you do have. The whole strokes gained thing would be more difficult, but that's not really necessary to work on it. Or just buy a Stack radar...

SuperSpeed Golf (@superspeedgolf) • Instagram reel 117 likes, 6 comments - superspeedgolf on February 9, 2025: "Sway too much in the backswing? You might need to work on your lateral force ⬅️➡️ Lateral Force is one of the 4 ground reaction force protocols we have in the... Thoughts? He talks quite a bit about GRF on the trail foot and when it should be higher - curious what people think of what he has to say.

I think BMR is pretty consistent given your body weight (lean body mass probably).

The way that I see this works is that your metabolic rate varies with your weight. If you weigh 150 lbs, your maintenance rate might be 1,800 calories a day. If you weigh 300 lbs, that might be 3,000 calories a day. I suspect that most people have a typical amount of calories that they consume in a given day. If that's 3,000 a day then eventually you're going to hit 300 lbs and stay there. If you want to get down to 150 lbs, then you need, long-term, to be eating 1,800 calories a day. That would have you losing roughly 2.5 lbs per week to begin with, but once you're half way there, it's more like 1.25 lbs and the last few lbs might take a few months. You can eat less than 1,800 calories and you'll get there faster. But if you go back to 3,000 calories a day then you're going to head back up to 300. Only way to stay at 150 is to stay at 1,800 calories/day. Or you spend 45 minutes a day on the treadmill and make that 2,000 calories. Hard to get around that though.