ncates00

You could add to the list two more similar to: - it’s just like a bad cold or the flu - I’m in good health; I workout all the time, eat right, and take care of my body/Joe Rogan-type argument.

Very cool that you’ve got gears. I’m sure it’ll help your students progress and benefit your own game, too. Should also help you “find it” if and when you get too busy to practice and play like we all would like.

I haven’t read the rule(s) regarding this, so forgive my ignorance. Surely players and caddies can use these off the course, though. I mean, I know most probably cannot memorize the information, but they could still get something from them. Maybe even use them in practice rounds or something.

Nah I think some are good. They never taste the same is how I would put it. Generally, I prefer fresh fruit, too, e.g., I’d rather have fresh strawberries, a banana, some watermelon, blueberries, and so on. But one example for me personally are cherries. Do not like cherries. Never have liked them, but I like cherry-flavored fruit candy. Tends to taste more like “fruit punch” or something. Hard to describe because fruit candy never tastes like the actual fruit. Also if the fruit is out of season, but still fresh, then I think the candy variant wins out at least in terms of taste.

Depends on my mood/craving. Sometimes I want something fruity like starburst, skittles, tootsie frooties. Sometimes I want some choc/PB like Reese’s. Sometimes I want Oreos haha

I would need to categorize my list based upon type. Chocolate/nut (e.g., Reese’s) list and then a fruity/sugar list (e.g., skittles).

That’s cool that you’re offering this.

My first big purchase was a brand new, at the time, Nike steel driver with a steel shaft. I think it was well under 460cc, maybe around 270-300 or something. It was back when I first started around 00-04-ish. I had a set of beat up northwestern(?) irons handed down and wanted a “cool” big, driver and got that out of a Golfsmith or tgw magazine. It looked awesome, to me. I think it came with a set of Nike TW tour accuracy balls and a bobble head, IIRC.

Chambers is still a great, as @boogielicious phrased it, links-ish course. I played it several years ago before the ‘15 USO. My wife walked it with me while she was pregnant. We enjoyed it.

I said I’m done. Besides, what I said is the process in a nutshell with regards to the federal religious exemptions, which is part of what I was talking about. Clearly, you have t read about them, and instead built up a big strawman. Ok, like I said, I’m done.

Bottom line, and I’m done: going back to your original post, you said refusing was just pushing an agenda. My whole point has been “no, it’s not just that.” It may be with some. Sure. But, not to everyone. Some people, whether we agree or not, have serious reservations. The reservations may be in different forms: being uneducated on the matter, general disposition of not trusting the government (like the black people example I gave earlier), religious reasons, etc. Again, in no way am I agreeing with these positions, as I want people to be vaccinated; but, I do disagree with your original statement, even as clarified.

This is simply not true. The fed likely has authority to do so. Politically unpopular, though, for sure, if not on medical grounds then certainly “use of power” grounds. That would be a big “no”. Poor reasoning there, I’m afraid. Just because one can do something, doesn’t mean they should or will. There are many moving parts to this, and a flexing of federal power isn’t something to be done lightly, even if many of us would agree with said flexing.

This demonstrates a clear lack of knowledge as to how religion is addressed at law. It’s not about how many religions do something, validity/truth/logic of beliefs, nor whether the religion is recognized, mainstream, etc., because of separation of church and state. The question is about the sincerity of such belief. One may have a sincere belief against vaccines (even if unfounded, and in our minds, dumb). Therefore, if the vetting process finds a sincerely held belief, then reasonable accommodations may be made. As I told the other guys earlier, read up on the process online; there’s plenty of legitimate articles out there, probably legal alerts from reputable firms, too. For instance, there’s a large black population who are rejecting vaccination due to last wrongs. Screw those concerns? In their mind, and maybe in fact, they have reason to pause, but science also tells us not to fear and to take it for the better of all of us. By the way, I’m not trying to “get” anyone here. I’m just saying there’s more to it than we think. Besides, @iacas, you should recall not long ago I lamented masking and wanted mandatory vaccination, to which you also cautioned me, despite, I think, understanding my point.

Wouldn’t be the first time you’ve been unclear. See the initial blanket, broad statement you made above. Look, I’m vaccinated (second dose received in early February) and want others to be vaccinated as it seems you do. But there’s more to it than what you let on in your earlier, overbroad statement. Perhaps you don’t think religious reasons are permissible, and I might agree with you, but there’s a process involved that deals with those. They’re not just Willy-nilly handing them out necessarily, as I briefly indicated above. Read up on the processes in place if you’d like to learn more; there are articles that present them out there on the web. But from the sounds of things, it doesn’t seem that anything is going to change your mind, so I may have wasted my time anyway.

It’s not your decision to make. If you don’t like it, take it up with your local representatives.

Unless the person has a valid medical reason to not get the vaccine, such as being under 12 years old, may have a severe allergic reaction to the vaccine, or other valid reasons. Moreover, a person may have religious reasons for refusing, but that’s a whole other can of worms involving questionnaires, determinations regarding the sincerity of beliefs, reasonable accommodations, etc. Life rarely involves blanket statements.

Europe will get a little better once Rory starts playing like Rory again. But then again, Rahm and Rory aren’t going to be enough. Hovland will get better, too.

Perhaps he has a bit of a poor attitude about the RC, but I’m happy to see folks share their feelings about things instead of just rattling off scripted statements. Sure, it’s a bummer he’s not super pumped for it, but maybe there’s more going on than we realize. Athletes are hardly the most open books out there or the most thoughtful in their statements. All too easy to read into things too much.

Go to a local golf shop and try stuff out on a good launch monitor against your own clubs. Some places let you do it for free. Others may charge by the hour. As mentioned above, the driver is a good one, so may not see much improvement there. However, some of the newer drivers may give you more ball speed and lower spin, so you may find some better drivers. Generally, for me, the only clubs that get changed out are my driver and wedges because I’m quite fond of everything else in my bag, but even my driver is a few generations old.

It seems obvious doesn’t it? $, time, etc.

I wouldn’t. I like to see one number on the top as I quickly pull it out of my bag to play my next shot. If you want to know the loft of your club, say for gapping purposes, then look it up. Knowing the static loft of your club is not going to help you on the course, and does nothing but force me to look at two digits instead of one to determine which club I’m pulling out of the bag.

This is the only one with which I disagree. Sometimes neither the pro nor the student can help it, e.g., when the range is busy. Just tune it out or wear head/earphones. Personally, I usually just tune it out (as I like to hear the strike), but sometimes I’ll put on some tunes—if I remembered my head/earphones.

Wouldn’t devices like this hinder your natural athletic ability and speed? Seems contrived.

Next time, challenge the guy to a duel.

@Vinsk