Jump to content

Ty_Webb

Established Member
  • Content Count

    338
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Ty_Webb last won the day on December 24 2017

Ty_Webb had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

60 Always in Contention

About Ty_Webb

  • Rank
    Well Established Member

Personal Information

  • Your Location
    New York

Your Golf Game

  • Handicap Index
    0.5
  • Handedness
    Righty

Recent Profile Visitors

1,478 profile views
  1. Exactly. 90% of the game can be covered by "tee it up between the two tee markers and not more than two clublengths behind them. Don't touch it with anything other than the club while hitting it and then hit the ball until it's in the hole." 9% can be covered by what to do if you lose it or hit it out of bounds, or need to take relief from something. One clublength if it's a free drop. Two clublengths if it's a penalty. Nothing difficult there. The vast majority of the complexity of the rules is down to the 1% of the time that someone does something stupid. The decisions book is basically entirely what to do if someone does something wrong.
  2. I think there are some simplifications, but the one that springs to mind doesn't make the game simpler for players, but rather for committees. That's the "penalty area" as opposed to water hazard. A water hazard under the current rules has to have water in it (or at least some of the time it must). That means that a committee can't just say if you hit it in the long grass, play it like a lateral hazard. Now they can (I think). Otherwise it seems like a fair amount of fiddling around and changing names of things, which will make things hard for a little while. I suspect that goes the other way.
  3. And I decided to figure it out. I think the week after the Masters in 2001, his ranking would have been 23.35 points average on the current method. That's assuming that tournaments then had the same points weighting as they do now and taking a guess at a couple of events that no longer exist. Either way, compare that with Brooks Koepka who right now has an average of 10.115, which is good for 1st place. Also worth bearing in mind that he wouldn't have that many points if Tiger had his results. I'd say that makes Phil's points tally pretty good. And Tiger's was spectacular.
  4. Take a look at it in early 2001. The system was different, but http://dps.endavadigital.net/owgr/doc/content/archive/2001/owgr20f.pdf I think puts him at 2.5 times Phil's points. 12.93 vs 32.33. I think that's the highest total he ever had. It would have included all four majors and the Players. Doubtful if he or anyone else has ever had more points than that. I'd be curious to see how many points that would give him right now in the current system, but I don't have the energy to figure it out at the moment. Maybe later today.
  5. I think I play better when I walk than when I ride. Two reasons. One is that walking helps my rhythm. My steps are like a metronome and that keeps my swing in (very slightly) better shape. The other is I have more time to drink in the surroundings. When I walk up to my ball, I'm typically coming up from behind it and I get a good idea of the lay of the land. When I ride, I get to the ball more quickly so I have less time and I'm frequently coming from another ball, so not up from behind. So I get less of an impression of the land and I'm not quite as well prepared. Both are very marginal and it could easily be just random variation, but the impression I get is I'm more comfortable walking and my scores are slightly better. Maybe a shot every other round kind of thing.
  6. Here is a way of looking at it. At the end of the week, the guy who wins probably had a good week putting. There is a lot of randomness in putting. A machine won't hole every putt even if you get hours to calibrate it over a 20 foot putt, it won't hole them all. People hole 20 foot putts, but they also miss them. They miss them a lot more than they hole them. Even the best. If they have a week where they hole more than their fair share they have a decent chance of winning. But no one holes more than their fair share every week. It's a lot more common for a player to have a day where they have a +4 strokes gained putting than it is to have a +4 strokes gained driving. But it's a lot more likely that the guy who averages +1 strokes gained driving will be at +1 strokes gained driving every week. That guy who does that and gets on a hot streak with the putter is going to win a lot more often than the guy who averages -1 strokes gained driving and gets hot with the putter from time to time. The reason that Tiger was so good for so long is because he was +0.7 driving and +2.5 approach every round. He could just putt average and be in contention, because he was beating everyone so hard from tee to green. Then when he had his good days on the greens, he'd obliterate the field. That wasn't because he was the best putter though. It's because he hit it close more than anyone else and gave himself the most opportunities. The problem with thinking back on your own rounds is that you remember the days when your putting was lights out, because those coincide with the low scores. But you can't putt lights out every time. Your putting on a given day dictates where in your typical range of scores you are going to wind up. Your long game dictates where that range of scores is. Take a scratch golfer. One who is a mediocre putter and pick anyone in the world to putt for them. They're not going to make it on the PGA Tour. Not a chance.
  7. So you beat your handicap and none of them played particularly well and you lost $30. I think that says everything we need to know about the wiseness of the bet. Well played, especially making the 4 on the last under the gun. Very good job keeping it to $30. I hope they bought you your steak dinner with that!
  8. 1. We made it to the semi-finals this year. Not a win but a very good showing. 2. I didn’t qualify for the met mid-am 😞 3. I did shoot a round under par. Left it late but did it a couple of weeks ago. Last tournament of the year. I was leading after round one with a 68. The two guys ahead of me were the met player of the year last year and the met player of the year this year. Wagr rankings of 500s and 135. That was pretty cool. I felt like an impostor on day two and didn’t play very well. 4. I started doing this. My wedge game has got a lot better and I had a very good day indeed In the Long Island mid-am. Hit it OB off the 1st and made triple and then bogeyed 2 before finishing with a +3 73. Good for T7 and I got up and down from 70-100 yards 4 times and missed a couple of four footers that would have made it six times too. 5. Putting has improved a lot. My 68 included being about +1.8 strokes gained putting including a 3 putt on 18 from 6 feet 6. Two aforementioned events got me points on the poty. Achieved 7. Long game had good spells and bad spells. Overall I’m pleased with the good stuff. Given that I basically get to play a couple of times a month I can’t complain about my results. All in all I’m calling this year a success. Didn’t manage all of my goals but a couple of them were big time stretches so I’m happy with my year.
  9. Understood. But what are places like this for if not to discuss the esoteric stuff? Out of curiosity what’s the other?
  10. That person who drops in the wrong place is losing out because they didn't know the rules. They are incentivized to learn the rules because they caught a penalty for playing from the wrong place (assuming they were caught). They can't have gained an advantage for playing from that wrong place, or they'd have got the DQ penalty anyway (serious breach). Thus, they have paid at least something for their mistake. I'm not too concerned about that person. You mentioned people who hit it in a water hazard and just don't count the penalty stroke. That's the person I'm trying to hoover up. If they say yes they took a drop for hitting it in the water, then I would ask them if they included the penalty stroke. If they said they had, then I'm good. If they said they hadn't, then I would make sure they added it. They've learned something and no one loses anything. I get that you're upset that this incentivizes people to not know the rules. I agree with you. It doesn't mean that we just have to fall back and say "well f*#& it there's nothing we can do". There are things we can do. Like this. From my perspective, I never thought of the penalty for signing for a wrong score as being to incentivize people to learn the rules. You sign your scorecard and hand it in, what you're doing is saying to everyone else in the event "here is my score, I am confirming that it is correct and you can rely on it". If someone else sees your score, finds out that they are 1 back with 1 hole to go, they may change the way they play that hole from if you had written down the correct score. The DQ penalty was to fix that. The 2 strokes was also kind of to fix that. Now you're no longer having to make that promise. As I think about it, I think that with the old rules, you had an incentive to ask about a potential penalty when you finished your round. If you didn't and it came up you'd get DQ'd or another 2 strokes. Now, you have no such incentive because why bring it up? That's I guess why I think there is value in asking people if anything came up about which they are not sure. I like to think that most people will do the right thing in that situation. What really annoys me about this change is it seems like it's there purely because the perception is that Lexi Thompson got 4 penalty strokes for moving her ball an inch. I have never marked a ball and picked it up without knowing where I had to put it to put it back where I picked it up from. The fact that she wasn't able to do that and that has apparently resulted in this rule change makes my blood boil.
  11. I don’t disagree. I was sharing a way of framing it that I found helpful to understand what is supposed to be meant when saying that. I thought it might be a helpful way for someone to reframe the idea when they have it wrong.
  12. The best way I heard this put is something along the lines of "you should care about the result, but not worry about the result. Think of it this way - consider the two phrases, said to you by a loved one "I care about you" and "I worry about you". They invoke very different feelings. You should care about the result, but the goal is not to worry about it." From my perspective, I wound up in a playoff earlier this year. It was sudden death and the first two holes had water left. During the round itself I had played it a bit too safe and wound up in the rough on the other side of the hole. In the playoff, I had to get going fairly quickly, so I took the point of view that I was going to aim it at the middle of the fairway and if I ended up pulling it (which I had done a couple of times that day), then I would be able to get going quicker. I hit it straight down the middle on 1 and 2. The one on 2 wound up in a deep divot and I couldn't hold the green from there and I wound up losing. It was very interesting to see how when I wasn't worried about the result (what if I hit it left), I hit much better shots - the two best drives I hit all day in fact. Unfortunately I do worry about results on the course a lot and I find it very hard to get over that.
  13. Do you mean left elbow just beginning to fold? The right arms look very straight to me in all cases. One other thing I think would be nice to mention (since it's near to my heart) is left wrist angles in particular at A4, A5 and A6. Cupped vs flat vs bowed in each case.
  14. For the record, I wouldn't be simply springing this on people. I would make certain that everyone knew before they started that they had to ask if they were unsure about any rules situation that came up. Then I would reiterate that while collecting the cards. If it was kids playing, I would have whoever collected cards explicitly ask them if they had any rules situation where they took drops or had to do something other than just hit the ball again. Then if something came up subsequently I would ask them why they didn't bring it up when they handed in their cards. I don't think any of that would be "tricking people".
  15. If you read again what I wrote you’ll note that I suggested asking a further question “were you certain there was no penalty?” The comment you quoted here was referencing the response to that question. No need to read any minds.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...