Jump to content


Established Member
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Ty_Webb last won the day on December 24 2017

Ty_Webb had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

49 Moving Up the Leaderboard

About Ty_Webb

  • Rank
    Well Established Member

Personal Information

  • Your Location
    New York

Your Golf Game

  • Handicap Index
  • Handedness

Recent Profile Visitors

903 profile views
  1. Southampton is not sectional. That's the preliminary one. Standard there will be decent, but there won't be any PGA Tour players there. I'd wait and go to the sectional qualifier at Canoe Brook (I think it is). That has 50 odd PGA Tour players playing at it. Standard there will be the highest that you'll see outside of going to Shinnecock. Southampton is right next door to Shinny though. I thought about playing there, but decided that my game isn't quite up to speed and I didn't want to find it very windy and get that letter from the USGA. Gonna stick with the US mid-am this year and toying with the US Am.
  2. Ty_Webb

    A Tough Putt

    My club back in the UK used to have a "Crazy Pins" competition once a year. They would put the holes on the middle of steep slopes and right on the edges of the greens and all sorts of shenanigans. Scoring was interesting to say the least. There's a good reason that there are guidelines for pin placements. There was one time I was playing at a course called Hunstanton in the UK. Greens were blindingly fast (putting green was stimping at 15, not sure about the course itself). It was kind of laughable. And windy. The 6th hole, the green is basically a shaved off hump about 10 feet or so higher than the surrounding ground and it was sloping downhill in the same direction as the wind was blowing. We and our opponents were both just on the front fringe and we were away, with about a 40 foot putt. We rolled it up about 6 feet short and the ball fell into a little indentation and stopped. Our opponents hit their putt 6 times and watched it come back to their feet every time. Then they conceded. Had it played out, they'd have had to hole a 40 footer and we'd have then had to hole from 6 feet to win. I think if we missed we'd have been declaring it unplayable and replaying the previous shot, so we'd have been trying to hole a 6 foot putt in half the number of goes that they took. Ridiculous.
  3. Ty_Webb

    A Tough Putt

    Interesting point. I was chatting to a friend of mine who has played (and won) on the European Tour. He's had some injury issues and is currently bouncing between the European Tour and the Challenge Tour. I said that GIR was pretty close to the best indicator of who the best player is (this was before strokes gained really became a thing). He said (and I think he was being somewhat ornery about it) that it is, but it misses the fact that you're not always trying to hit the green. From his point of view there were times when he would rather be chipping from 15 feet away in a good spot than putting from a bad spot. His short game is of a level where a 15 foot chip he's expecting to make probably as often as he holes putts from that range, so that may have something of an impact on it. Mine is not. I thought it was an interesting way of looking at it. Thinking outside the box indeed.
  4. Ty_Webb

    How can I go up from 105 mph?

    I have seen statistics that suggest that typically (i.e. on average) longer people also hit it straighter. It's true that there are some people who hit it miles and it goes all over the place, but generally speaking, I think that if you have your swing in a good enough place to be able to hit it hard, then likely you have it in sequence and are hitting it fairly square and it goes fairly straight. Also it's much easier to learn straight than it is to learn long. With kids it's best to get them hitting it as hard as they can and then work on straightening things up later on. Lastly I am somewhere in the 105 to 110 range. I don't get the best out of it because I get a little steep and flip so I wind up with a fairly high dynamic loft, which drops my smash factor a little. I would dearly love to get that speed up to 115 and get a more powerful hit. I'm working on both things, with superspeed golf for the speed and lessons for the hit. If you find a good answer to the question that works for you, let me know!
  5. Yep - there are +3s around me who are having to qualify to get into local Met area amateur tournaments.
  6. No it still matters. 70 against a 78/145 course would be -8 x 113/145 = -6.2 differential. 10 of those with the 0.96 multiplier would give you a handicap index of +6.0. When you go play that course, you multiply your index by the slope over 113 to give you your course handicap (+6.0 x 145/113 = +8). Then if you shoot 70 again you played to your handicap. If you go play a course that is rated 78/113, you'd be +6 and be expected to shoot 72. It's worth noting that a course that is rated 78/113 is probably very long indeed. Much longer than the 78/145 course, but would have a lot less trouble around.
  7. You're missing the slope, which would tend to pull that index down. That said, the world has quite a few +4 players who can't make a cut on the mini tours. Out on the PGA tour, you need to be capable of shooting 63 on a course that's rated 76+. That doesn't add up to worse than +5 IMO. So I went with +5 or better. There are some +4s out there who will make it on tour, but they won't be +4 anymore once they get to that point. The guys making a living on the PGA tour are better than you can imagine.
  8. Ty_Webb

    Tiger Woods Master Catch-All Discussion

    I'm starting with 2001. The fourth in a row. I've never seen 1986 before, so likely will go with that one after.
  9. Hi all i recently picked up some leather headcovers and they look great. I am however worried about my shafts getting worn where they rub on my golf bag. Shafts are expensive and I don’t want to have to replace them because of wear. Does anyone else have headcovers that don’t cover the shaft and if so, what do you do to protect the shaft? I’m thinking about putting tape on there but I’m not sure if it’s legal and it likely won’t look great unless I can find some clear stuff. Thanks!
  10. Ty_Webb

    Jack vs. Tiger: Who's the Greatest Golfer?

    This is touching on what bothers me about this argument. We have two incredible players here. Both are leaps and bounds above their peers. I don’t think anyone would dispute that and if they did I think they’d get laughed out of the room. But, in building your argument for why your choice is the better of the two, it’s virtually impossible to do that without sounding like your downplaying the achievements of the other. Say you’re a jack fan and you talk about how there were more great champions in his day. More people who won stacks of majors. Inevitably someone says yeah but it was easier to win multiple then, so you say nuh uh the kids these days are spoilt and just play for a check. Each step takes you further towards my side is the best and your side sucks. It’s very easy to fall into that mode. I hate that. The bottom line is there is no way to know for certain who is better between jack and tiger. They never played each other in their primes so we can’t be sure. We can look at objective facts around who they played against and draw conclusions based on likelihoods, but they are not certainties. Given the depth of fields now, which is objectively deeper and more international it’s very likely that it’s harder to win a major now but we don’t know that for sure. It is possible (though unlikely) that the shallower fields in the 60s and 70s actually were better than the deeper fields of the 00s and 10s. The odds suggest that is highly unlikely but to not a certainty.
  11. Ty_Webb

    Tiger Woods Master Catch-All Discussion

    There aren't many for sure. DJ perhaps, Thomas perhaps, Phil perhaps (Phil is like an Augusta expert and he just won). Rose maybe at a stretch, but it's a stretch. Rahm has been playing extremely well. Honestly I think all of them are pretty much on a par and I think that Tiger is in there with them. He didn't look to me like he hit it that great today, but he made a few putts and he hit some really good short game shots and his misses while a long way from the middle of the fairway were not dead (apart from 3 anyway). I guess bottom line is there is no one who I would say is obviously ahead of him right now. But I think there are a handful on par (right now - like I said if he wins this week, he puts distance there) with him. I remember back in around 2005 or so, Tiger was playing Bay Hill and he kept hitting draws everywhere. They weren't helping him at all, but he was practising for the Masters. He still won. I don't see that right now. He's playing to win yes, but he's just playing to win this. It's very exciting.
  12. Ty_Webb

    Tiger Woods Master Catch-All Discussion

    That is crazy town. I happen to like Tiger's chances of winning the Masters, but I don't know that I'd go so far as to say he's the favourite. Not before he finishes up this week anyway. If he wins this week, then yes maybe. Long way to go before that though. I think 15/1 sounds about right right now. I'd put money on him there. Not at 8/1 though. 8/1 is shorter odds than virtually anyone not named Tiger has ever been for a major.
  13. Ty_Webb

    Jack vs. Tiger: Who's the Greatest Golfer?

    Precisely. If I might expand a little. Imagine two golf clubs. Each club has 4 tournaments a year. Both clubs have 150 people at them. The first one has ten scratch players and 140 15 handicaps. Those ten scratch players divvy up the tournaments among themselves and basically no one else ever wins one. After 20 years, they wind up with one guy having 18, one guy having 11, one having 9, one having 8, one having 7 and the others sharing 5 or 6 each. The second club has 149 +6 handicaps and one guy who's a +10. Over that same 20 year stretch, The +10 has won 14, one guy has 5, another couple have 3 and then the rest have split 2, 1 or 0. There are some who would say that the guy with 18 at the first club is obviously better because he's won 18 while the guy at the second club has only won 14. They may even point to the fact that the guy who won 18 had to compete with people who won 11, 9, 8 and 7 etc. They would ignore the fact that it was spectacularly more difficult to win at the second club, as demonstrated by the fewer people who won lots of tournaments. And they would be straight up wrong. To put that another way, Tiger has won 2.8 times as many majors as anyone else over the period since he started winning them. Jack only won 2 times as many as anyone else during his heyday. My final thought on the matter is look at who Tiger has lost close ones to. Trevor Immelman, Rich Beem, YE Yang, Michael Campbell. Those guys wouldn't even have been playing in Jack's day. Take them out of the field and Tiger has 18.
  14. Ty_Webb

    Jack vs. Tiger: Who's the Greatest Golfer?

    It's easy to be a big fish in a small pond.
  15. The Masters used to be very difficult to qualify for if you didn't play on the PGA Tour. There were maybe something like 6 or 7 Europeans in the team back in the early 90s. I remember it always being a point of discussion back then. It used to be that winning a PGA Tour event was your ticket to the Masters. Now I think they invite the top 50 in the world. I'm not sure when that started. The PGA was also very US focused around that time. The Open was more eclectic, but even then around that time there were americans who wouldn't make the trip - I remember Scott Hoch getting some grief in the UK press for skipping it. I suspect he couldn't have cared less and I'm not sure what the fuss was about, but he was a good player who wasn't playing. US Open was also more open, but to qualify for that I think people had to come over and play in the qualifiers, and the timing of those was such that you had to either spend about 6 weeks in the US or fly back and forth three times. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if it was the late 90s before the norm was to have all the best players in the world playing in them. 1990 Masters: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1990_Masters_Tournament 68 Americans, 8 Europeans, 5 Australians, 2 Asians and 2 South Africans. Note the exemption categories too. Even winning the Open didn't get you into it. Compare that with the 2017 Masters: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Masters_Tournament#Nationalities_in_the_field 41 Americans, 3 Canadians, 4 South Americans, 28 Europeans, 5 Australians, 1 Fijian, 6 Asians and 5 South Africans. 1997 Masters: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1997_Masters_Tournament#Nationalities_in_the_field 60 Americans, 14 Europeans, 4 Australians, 1 Fijian, 1 New Zealander, 2 Asians, 3 Saffers and 2 Zimbabwe 2005 Masters: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_Masters_Tournament#Nationalities_in_the_field 49 Americans, 2 Canadians, 2 South Americans, 21 Europeans, 8 Australians, 1 Fiji, 3 Asians, 6 South Africans and 1 Zimbabwe They don't have a similar breakdown for the US Open and the PGA, so I don't know how those shook out (I probably could find out, but I have actual work to do). Either way, it's pretty clear how much more of a worldwide field is out there now compared with even 20 years ago and especially 30 years ago. 13 years ago looks much more like now though. I also took a look at Langer and Faldo's results timelines in the majors. They were pretty good in the early 80s and the DNPs are fairly clear. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Faldo#Results_timeline https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernhard_Langer#Results_timeline

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...