Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'poll'.
Found 9 results
-
Just answer the poll, and you must choose one or the other.
-
I think the game would be better off. Not by a lot, but enough to notice. Less land would be required. Rounds would take about 2.5 hours. Golf would cost less. Golf would require less land. The truly dedicated could still play 24 or 36 in a day. I almost kinda wish it was 12 holes, really. Try to let go of your hold on 9 and 18… and imagine a world in which golf was 12 holes, and what that would mean.
-
How long do you use the same ball for? Multiple holes? Multiple Rounds? Use it till you lose it? I used to lose multiple balls a round. But that is becoming less frequent. I realized today I have a ball that has been through 2 rounds. It has some minor scratches. I'll probably keep using it for now. -
Over the past few years I've been trying to overcome the challenges that have kept me from playing more golf. I've even gone so far as to create an app. to help me and my friends play more golf together. I'm curious about what, if anything, is preventing you from playing as much golf as you would like.
-
When looking at PGA Tour leader boards during opening rounds of tournaments where no one has finished the round yet, I often see several players at -1, some after a couple holes, some on the back nine of their round and I wonder: Would a PGA Tour player would rather be -1 after two holes (great start) or -1 after nine holes (consistent performance with some upside potential on the back nine) during the opening round of a tournament? What do you think? -
I know it's winter, so there may be a lot of "dormant" choices. But I'm curious to know where everyone feels about their game. Are we generally an optimistic lot? I'd think that those who are backsliding might self-select out of joining golf forums, so we will likely see people who are on the upswing, or are content with their play.
-
I do.
-
Just for fun.... Long story short: I left my Cleveland CG15 60° wedge around my CC's 9th green ~4/5 weeks ago. Figured it'd get turned in, but no luck so far. Tried to be patient, but our club's steep bunkers, firm/quick greens and tight pin placements are killing me. My 54° just isn't a match for many of them no matter how much I open it up. Today I purchased a Rotex 2.0 60° (satin, blade-style, mid-bounce - the exact equivalent of my previous 60°). Of course, the purchase guarantees that the previous wedge will be turned in to the shop, probably within 12-24 hours. Regardless, predict here what you believe the results of my first shot will be w/the new wedge. Not sure if rain will let me out tonight, but I'll post back as soon as I'm able to go out. Some pertinent general info: I'm currently a 13.2, but with lots of upside, just joined my club ~2 mos. back and getting back into playing a lot I don't take many full shots w/the 60°; it'd have to be a tight front pin ~65-70 yds Generally it's 1/2 - 2/3 pitches and lobs around the green, and the 60° is my primary bunker wedge (especially at my home club) I don't chip w/the 60°; it'd take an unusual lie and pin/green-contour situation These aren't the cavity-back Clevelands - they're blade-style. Suitable for a mid-handicapper?? Hmmm... Some pertinent info relating to each scenario: Knocked it stiff: I'm a pretty good ball striker w/my wedges relative to my handicap Buttery shank: When it happens, it happens w/my 54° & 60° (but the Cleveland wedges make it feel amazing!) Sand screamer: Rain lately has our (very treacherous!) bunkers firm at the bottoms, and I've been bouncing the edge a bit Laid sod: Very rare if in fairway or fringe, but our thick, Alabama bermuda rough around the greens will extricate your soul Feel free to present another option if you don't like mine. Be brutal if you wanna - this is intended for fun and I don't get offended! And, believe me, all options are possible! BamaWade -
Describe your course's handicap committee. Who are the members? Who is the chairman? Do they meet? Have you ever interacted with them? If you don't know, say that.
