Horse racing.
Bubba turning Doral into a pitch and putt..
- Thread starter Tball88
- Start date
- Status
duckjr78
New
Meh, the horses are the athletes in that sport. I like your style though.
dschultz6072
New
Darts.
taller guy probably has advantage in darts because his hand is closer to the board.
Jim Kobylinski
Super Moderator
keep the thread on track or i may get delete post happy...bickering isn't good for anyone.
Dariusz J.
New member
Yep. There is no use to discuss for 35th time the same issue with another guy who is resistant with understanding. Your last sentences of your lats post in this thread (as well as your hysterical reactions after it) confirm it strongly.
Cheers
Dariusz J.
New member
I cannot find a hole in your way of thinking. This is how it should be. However, it isn't like this in today's golf. 99% of setups favour some skills over the others. I'd keep silent if it was 50% or even 60%, but not almost 100%.
Cheers
Is it possible to find a setup like this? Depending on how you choose to toughen up a course, it's going to favor the individual whose skill set matches up best with those obstacles. And if a player is really on, and has a high enough skill level, the course setup won't matter much at all, will it?
Dariusz J.
New member
Of course you're right. But history shows that there were no really "complete" players. Some had great accuracy skills while putting worse than 25 hcp amateur, some had length and putts, some had great short game with mediocre ballstriking,etc. etc.
What I meant is that there should be some tournaments where great accuracy pays off, some where great putting does, some where length does. Conversely, some where lack of accuracy is severely punished, some where lack of great putting skills is punished, etc. etc. Nowadays, we come to such ridiculous situations that a LD champ has a better start off on tour than a hypothetical true golf shot artist who is short off the tee. All because favouring only one type of course setup. Such an approach will soon kill golf and transform it into a discipline where only few can really play.
Cheers
drewyallop
New
... and bigger guy can hold more beer.
dschultz6072
New
When the day comes such Bubba Watsons are not winning tournament with 2.3% FIR (ROFL) and 432 yd driving distances it will be the joyous time (e.g. Christmas and New Years). Such courses are still favoring long bomb and gouge players with no abilities, Dustin Johnsons, Watsons, Hank Kuehnes, et al.
Personally I think it's a boring game to watch. Listening to Gary Koch gush all over Bubba flying the ball 330 yds into par 4 green side bunkers does nothing for me. Yeah don't watch I get it. I think we need a little more Harbour Town and a little less TPC.
Jared Willerson
Super Moderator
No.
I do find it odd that the media makes a big deal about how golfers are getting bigger and bigger but "seems as if" to me for every bomber out there that is 6'4 220, there are 6 guys out there 5'10 170 or smaller, with just as many of the small guys being the next big thing eg. Cauley, Fowler, English, McIlroy, Mannasero....not a big guy in that bunch.
I have noticed Rory McIlroy's swing speed this year has increased some 5 mph. He must be putting some time in the conditioning aspect.
Last edited:
Jim Kobylinski
Super Moderator
He did, read an article on him in Men's Health. Got pretty big (for him)
mgranato
New
What I find entertaining in this (and similar) discussion, is that those who like defending the honor of the tradition of the game only go back in history as far as it's convenient.
The de facto position that golf was a game of precision and accuracy is silly, and only substantiated if you stop your jaunt through history at your favorite player's era.
Let's be real traditionalists. The game wasn't played on fairways. Fairways are a modern invention. Golf was played in open areas (fields, pastures) and from brutal lies. Bomb and gouge was the style the game was founded on... with a heavy emphasis on gouge. The idea was to advance the ball as close to the hole as possible with each shot. The goal being to avoid the areas that give you trouble. The game was never intended to be a display of accuracy at a deeper level than getting the ball in the hole in the fewest number of strokes.
If you hold hitting an unusual amount of fairways in high esteem, you like a certain style. Not a better style, just a style. Nothing in history says "this is how the game should be played". It's no different than playing with your pants hiked up around your chest... it's a style.
The de facto position that golf was a game of precision and accuracy is silly, and only substantiated if you stop your jaunt through history at your favorite player's era.
Let's be real traditionalists. The game wasn't played on fairways. Fairways are a modern invention. Golf was played in open areas (fields, pastures) and from brutal lies. Bomb and gouge was the style the game was founded on... with a heavy emphasis on gouge. The idea was to advance the ball as close to the hole as possible with each shot. The goal being to avoid the areas that give you trouble. The game was never intended to be a display of accuracy at a deeper level than getting the ball in the hole in the fewest number of strokes.
If you hold hitting an unusual amount of fairways in high esteem, you like a certain style. Not a better style, just a style. Nothing in history says "this is how the game should be played". It's no different than playing with your pants hiked up around your chest... it's a style.
What I find entertaining in this (and similar) discussion, is that those who like defending the honor of the tradition of the game only go back in history as far as it's convenient.
The de facto position that golf was a game of precision and accuracy is silly, and only substantiated if you stop your jaunt through history at your favorite player's era.
Let's be real traditionalists. The game wasn't played on fairways. Fairways are a modern invention. Golf was played in open areas (fields, pastures) and from brutal lies. Bomb and gouge was the style the game was founded on... with a heavy emphasis on gouge. The idea was to advance the ball as close to the hole as possible with each shot. The goal being to avoid the areas that give you trouble. The game was never intended to be a display of accuracy at a deeper level than getting the ball in the hole in the fewest number of strokes.
If you hold hitting an unusual amount of fairways in high esteem, you like a certain style. Not a better style, just a style. Nothing in history says "this is how the game should be played". It's no different than playing with your pants hiked up around your chest... it's a style.
Why do you hate Ben Hogan????????
What I find entertaining in this (and similar) discussion, is that those who like defending the honor of the tradition of the game only go back in history as far as it's convenient.
The de facto position that golf was a game of precision and accuracy is silly, and only substantiated if you stop your jaunt through history at your favorite player's era.
Let's be real traditionalists. The game wasn't played on fairways. Fairways are a modern invention. Golf was played in open areas (fields, pastures) and from brutal lies. Bomb and gouge was the style the game was founded on... with a heavy emphasis on gouge. The idea was to advance the ball as close to the hole as possible with each shot. The goal being to avoid the areas that give you trouble. The game was never intended to be a display of accuracy at a deeper level than getting the ball in the hole in the fewest number of strokes.
If you hold hitting an unusual amount of fairways in high esteem, you like a certain style. Not a better style, just a style. Nothing in history says "this is how the game should be played". It's no different than playing with your pants hiked up around your chest... it's a style.
I have to admit that I never really thought about it this way, but you make a very valid point, especially when some Links golf venues are considered. After all, those venues were originally grazing pastures for livestock, right?
What I find entertaining in this (and similar) discussion, is that those who like defending the honor of the tradition of the game only go back in history as far as it's convenient.
The de facto position that golf was a game of precision and accuracy is silly, and only substantiated if you stop your jaunt through history at your favorite player's era.
Let's be real traditionalists. The game wasn't played on fairways. Fairways are a modern invention. Golf was played in open areas (fields, pastures) and from brutal lies. Bomb and gouge was the style the game was founded on... with a heavy emphasis on gouge. The idea was to advance the ball as close to the hole as possible with each shot. The goal being to avoid the areas that give you trouble. The game was never intended to be a display of accuracy at a deeper level than getting the ball in the hole in the fewest number of strokes.
If you hold hitting an unusual amount of fairways in high esteem, you like a certain style. Not a better style, just a style. Nothing in history says "this is how the game should be played". It's no different than playing with your pants hiked up around your chest... it's a style.
Maybe you are correct in your hypothesis but do you honestly think for 1 second the penalty is the same for going off the beaten path today as it was back then? Come on now.
- Status