Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2 Sandbagger

About humblepeasant

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

424 profile views
  1. I just started wearing a glove at the beginning of this year. I have a tendency to squeeze the club too tight, and the added feeling of tackiness from wearing a glove has helped me with that...I just naturally squeeze the club less tightly if it feels tackier I also got new grips at the same time, so probably a combo effect. When I swing the club without a glove now, I really miss it. Probably just what you're used to.
  2. Shoot, sorry I meant to post this in "Golf Talk." Not sure how to move it or delete it at this point.
  3. I'm usually someone who walks straight to the first tee, but I've recently been reconsidering that. The first shot always feels a little uncertain...just hitting a handful of balls beforehand might be nice. Also, sometimes I just have off-days chipping/putting on the course, so it might be nice to try and work out any kinks before heading out (just 5-10 minutes maybe). Just curious what others on here do. The people I usually play with tend not to practice at all before a round.
  4. I know, but you were...I was responding to your comment about my text you had just quoted. I know that how the club-head hits the ball determines the ball flight (and that higher skill results in better and more consistent contact). That's not inconsistent with what I'm saying about the randomness of results. That "randomness" is not at all what I'm talking about when I talk about the randomness of the results. I obviously fail to communicate. I'd be interested to hear someone else, in their own words, explain to me the point I'm trying to make (even/especially if they disagree with it), because I don't think people are getting it (much less actually disagreeing with it). Most of the "counter-arguments" I'm in full agreement with and are not actually counter to my theory. I've honestly already put too much time into this thread, so unless I have a eureka moment of a new way to put it, I'm tapping out. I would recommend the books "Fooled By Randomness" by Nassim Nicholas Taleb and "Free Will" by Sam Harris. I think that my recent post here from this morning is still the best way I know how to try to convey what I'm trying to say:
  5. The particular idea you quoted, I didn't think anyone disagrees with...? If a player pars a hole 80% of the time, we could say that they have an 80% chance of paring the hole. I didn't think that was controversial. In theory a robot could have perfect control...including in a physical coin toss. But we don't. And because we don't, that's where the randomness of our results creeps in. This is starting to remind me of discussions of free will. I would contend that free will, at least the way most people tend to think of it, is an illusion. Would you guys agree or disagree with that claim? I know I'm starting to drift a bit off topic from golf, and I'm content to agree to disagree. I'm aware that I fail to convince even a single person here, and it's certainly a red flag to me when it's "everyone else" who is wrong. Accordingly, I've really thought twice and thrice about what I've claimed, tried to have an open mind to criticism, but so far I still stand by it. 🤷‍♂️
  6. We can know someone's long term statistics. If on a particular hole, someone scores a 4 50% of the time, 5 30%, 3 10%, and 6 10%, we don't have to be blind to that and we can of course calculate someone's "chances" of scoring this or that on a given hole. I don't think we're in disagreement here. Even given all that, I think the individual result, within those given parameters, is random. For example, a coin toss: 50/50 chance heads/tails. However, if you flip it enough, you'll no doubt flip heads 10x in a row. *When* that happens to occur is what is random. It's only in the long term can we be confident that we'll get a 50/50 result of heads/tails (or in the case of some trick coin, maybe the odds are 60/40 heads/tails, etc.). Someone might argue that golf is different, because we have more control over what happens than a coin toss. I would argue that, within the proper parameters (an adjustment for skill level), we don't! If we did, with an adjustment for course conditions, wouldn't we pretty much score the same thing every time? But we don't have that kind of control, we have good days and bad days, no matter what we do. We practice and improve in order to improve the parameters, lower our handicap, etc. And having parameters doesn't mean it's not random. Without some parameters, statistical analysis can't be done. Maybe that's the source of some of the disagreement/miscommunication...I'm not contending that your result is completely random with no parameters...that there are lottery balls bouncing around and there are an equal number of "1" balls, "2" balls, "3" balls, etc., and that your score is no different than picking a ball like that. I'm getting the impression now that that might be what some people thought my contention was, and of course that's obviously not true! I'll also add: due to our hindsight bias, past scores will always look less random than they were. No doubt!!! 😄
  7. Off to bed soon, but the interesting thing here is that of all the rebuttals that have been given, I really don’t disagree with anything that’s been said (other than that I’m wrong with my assertion haha). What I would say is that the points made in the rebuttals are ALSO true, but they don’t run counter to what I was trying to say. If I think of a different way I could put it tomorrow, I’ll chime back in. I might just be crazy! I will admit, the way I worded the title was intentionally provocative...I could have simply said that it’s important to have proper expectations that there are simply going to be good days and bad days, no matter what you do, and therefore don’t get too high on the good days or too low on the bad days...realistic expectations are key to enjoyment. I think people are hung up on that word “random.” 🤔 Good night!
  8. A random data set has parameters (for example, a minimum and maximum to define a range). It's using an understanding of the math/statistics in order to improve one's mental state while on the course.
  9. Yes, exactly...the range is your edge. Where in that range you are on any particular day is what is helpful to my psyche to view as more random. (And as you work hard and improve, that range will trend downward)
  10. i guess for me I'm thinking more in terms of longer-term data analysis...I haven't spent time testing it, but I'd be willing to bet that the distribution curve of a random set of data (with certain parameters) and somebody's individual golf scores would be virtually indistinguishable. Now of course I could have a day where I'm struggling with something very specific that I know I'm doing wrong...a problem I sometimes have is keeping my weight back and hitting behind the ball with my irons. I might have a day where I'm struggling with that, and plus maybe I'm really tense when I'm putting and missing short putts, etc. So my bad score that day isn't random, I know what the problem was. But I know I'm just going to have days where I struggle with something like that, and I'm going to have days when it seems more effortless. Which day is which to me is what is more random. And if I know, statistically, to expect to have days like that, I can just understand it's just a part of the game, and still enjoy myself. For me often if I've had a couple really good rounds in a row, I'll start expecting to continue to do that well, and get really angry and discouraged when the bad round I should have been EXPECTING finally comes around. I guess this all comes down to having realistic expectations for me. How happy we are is usually a measure of how reality played out relative to our expectations. That's not to say you don't continue to learn, practice, work hard to improve, take responsibility, etc. Back to the casino analogy...you're working to improve your edge! But, the edge plays itself out over the long term and, to me, it's not the best idea to put too much weight on any individual result. And obviously it's not random if a pro scores a 65 and beginner scores 120...this is more about just our own personal one set of data/scores. But hopefully I've gotten my idea across, and I understand some will disagree.
  11. I've recently found that viewing any individual day or round as a random result greatly reduces the amount of frustration/anxiety/etc. that I feel while out on the course. It frees me up a lot more to just enjoy being out there and take in the beauty of the course, while understanding that I'm just going to do how I'm going to do. Now of course it's not truly 100% random, but I think it's helpful to view it as such, and it might as well be with so many variables. I think we all have days where everything's just coming together really nicely, and days where it's a serious grind. You can have a day that's a real struggle, not work on anything at all, come back out 2 days later and have your best round of the month. There are just so many variables that contribute to how any individual round goes, both internal and external, that it might as well be counted as random. Now you can track long-term performance and have confidence in analysis, stats, trends, etc. You continue to try your best to play well, improve, practice, etc. But having the focus only on the long term results, not on TODAY, has really freed me up to enjoy the game a lot more. I liken the idea a bit to a casino...the casino has an edge...say a 60% chance of winning, and over the long term that edge plays itself out. But any given individual play is basically a random result. I just thought I'd share because it's helped me. It might just be how my mind/emotions work though. Any thoughts?
  12. Actually I guess I'm not sure...I just remember the USGA course handicap calculator used to prompt you to enter you handicap index, and it would specify a range of +9.9 to 36.4 for men. But that might have just been the calculator 🤷‍♂️
  13. Is the minimum handicap index still a +9.9, like it was before the WHS in the US? I know they raised the max to 54, but I haven’t read about a minimum. Wondering if there is no longer any minimum. Certainly nothing any of us will ever probably really need to think about, just a random thought/question I had haha
  • 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...