Danny Lee

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Chris Sturgess

New member
What do you all think about the winner of the US Am having to stay an amateur to get to play in the Masters, US Open, British Open next year? I think it's stupid and pointless. As long as he's an amateur while playing in the US Amateur then why should his future amateur status matter. Danny Lee is as ready to be a professional golfer as anyone in the world who is not already on the PGA, European, or Nationwide tour. I mean he just casually finished 20th in a PGA Tour event a couple weeks ago. He might actually be a top 50 money list caliber guy right now. But he's supposed to put all that on hold for another year because of this stupid rule. Why? Because tournament directors think it's cute to have a little (a) next to his name in the majors next year, as if that means they are doing some holy charity work. What a joke.
 
self-mastery

self-mastery

New
Chris Sturgess said:
What do you all think about the winner of the US Am having to stay an amateur to get to play in the Masters, US Open, British Open next year? I think it's stupid and pointless. As long as he's an amateur while playing in the US Amateur then why should his future amateur status matter. Danny Lee is as ready to be a professional golfer as anyone in the world who is not already on the PGA, European, or Nationwide tour. I mean he just casually finished 20th in a PGA Tour event a couple weeks ago. He might actually be a top 50 money list caliber guy right now. But he's supposed to put all that on hold for another year because of this stupid rule. Why? Because tournament directors think it's cute to have a little (a) next to his name in the majors next year, as if that means they are doing some holy charity work. What a joke.
Click to expand...

It is silly! I wouldn't postpone my professional career just for an invite to the Masters, the US Open, and the Open Championship. If he's any good, then he will earn his way into all of the above tourneys. Wasting time just to play in a few majors is retardodando.
 
N

niblick1

New
Brian Manzella said:
Teaching them JUNK.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

His story makes me think of Rafael Nadal, learning tennis from and playing with his uncle (who was a pro) in Mallorca. Does anyone think he would have been better growing up at a tennis academy in the US (even if those tennis academies do have a better record than certain golf academies).
 
Last edited:
K

Kevin Shields

Super Moderator
Chris Sturgess said:
What do you all think about the winner of the US Am having to stay an amateur to get to play in the Masters, US Open, British Open next year? I think it's stupid and pointless. As long as he's an amateur while playing in the US Amateur then why should his future amateur status matter. Danny Lee is as ready to be a professional golfer as anyone in the world who is not already on the PGA, European, or Nationwide tour. I mean he just casually finished 20th in a PGA Tour event a couple weeks ago. He might actually be a top 50 money list caliber guy right now. But he's supposed to put all that on hold for another year because of this stupid rule. Why? Because tournament directors think it's cute to have a little (a) next to his name in the majors next year, as if that means they are doing some holy charity work. What a joke.
Click to expand...

I see your point but consider the source. The entities who run those events still hold amateur status very high and representation from true amateurs is what they are looking for.
 
C

Chris Sturgess

New member
And why would they hold amateur status high? What is the legitimate reason for that? Because Bobby Jones was an amateur? That was almost 100 years ago now, professional golf was a joke back then. Now it's big business. They might as well make everybody wear a tie and play with a mashie niblick. I would say their only reason is the selfish one of those entities saving a million dollars or so by not paying them. It's clearly not what's best for Danny Lee.
 
Last edited:
C

Chris Sturgess

New member
niblick1 said:
Exactly.

His story makes me think of Rafael Nadal, learning tennis from and playing with his uncle (who was a pro) in Mallorca. Does anyone think he would have been better growing up at a tennis academy in the US (even if those tennis academies do have a better record than certain golf academies).
Click to expand...

That's a good point. I hate the cookie cutter nature of these academies. It does work for some ordinary people. But it kills innovation. Nadal plays tennis like nobody in the history of the world, he does his own thing and it's better than any tennis academy could ever teach.

(btw, I am about a "scratch" tennis player and while I think most people teaching golf are clueless morons, I can attest that tennis instruction in general is amazingly even dumber)
 
P

pecky987

New
Chris Sturgess said:
That's a good point. I hate the cookie cutter nature of these academies. It does work for some ordinary people. But it kills innovation. Nadal plays tennis like nobody in the history of the world, he does his own thing and it's better than any tennis academy could ever teach.

(btw, I am about a "scratch" tennis player and while I think most people teaching golf are clueless morons, I can attest that tennis instruction in general is amazingly even dumber)
Click to expand...

heres a story i can give.

theres a young lad i play with reguarly. he is a good player, around a 6/7 handicapp for most of the season and has now got down to a 5.

he receives regional coaching from some of the areas "top" coaches from other clubs.

now, as a breif background, this player has a tendency to aim to the right and hit a lil' bit of a pull draw or a sam snead pull. and he did it very well. problem occurs when he makes one of his regular trip to our practice ground. he does what every good player does and lays a club parallel to his target line so he sets up square. he then makes his swing that works great on the course and hits a bit of an ugly pull. so he tries to straighten it out, maybe succesfully, gets back on the course and aims a little to the right again (without him knowing he was) makes his "altered" swing and it goes to the right. he fixes on the fly get it back at the target but then hits it bad at the range and the whole ugly circle loops around again.

i was at the range with him not long ago and he complained he was pulling it - again.

i explained to him how he aims differently on the course as he does on the range, and really how you line up doesn't really matter that much as long as it enables you to hit it where you want. his reply annoyed me.

"i have to aim straight. if i dont then at Yorkshire coaching they'll tell me off for aiming to the right."

all the coaches care about is how the swing looks. if his swing matched up with their video of adam scott on their laptop, thats all that mattered. even if he hit the ball better with his "incorrect" way of setting up.

players are over coached nowadays. i've heard it said it happens over the pond. but i think it happens over here as well. i watched a regional junior comp with some of the best juniors from the area. they have all received similar coaching from the same coaches throughout their development. and surprise surprise, they all look VERY similar. even for someone with my well trained eye ;):cool: struggled to see much difference between them all.

they all swing too far to the right. they all have a delayed pivot with resticted hip turn and strong grips.

i hate the way nowadays people value looks over substance. in the olden days players learnt a swing which hit the ball best. not which looked the best. if what looked the best actually WAS the best then Steve Elkington and Jonathan Bryd would have beaten Nicklaus' record many years ago IMO

rant over
 
C

Chris Sturgess

New member
pecky987 said:
heres a story i can give.

theres a young lad i play with reguarly. he is a good player, around a 6/7 handicapp for most of the season and has now got down to a 5.

he receives regional coaching from some of the areas "top" coaches from other clubs.

now, as a breif background, this player has a tendency to aim to the right and hit a lil' bit of a pull draw or a sam snead pull. and he did it very well. problem occurs when he makes one of his regular trip to our practice ground. he does what every good player does and lays a club parallel to his target line so he sets up square. he then makes his swing that works great on the course and hits a bit of an ugly pull. so he tries to straighten it out, maybe succesfully, gets back on the course and aims a little to the right again (without him knowing he was) makes his "altered" swing and it goes to the right. he fixes on the fly get it back at the target but then hits it bad at the range and the whole ugly circle loops around again.

i was at the range with him not long ago and he complained he was pulling it - again.

i explained to him how he aims differently on the course as he does on the range, and really how you line up doesn't really matter that much as long as it enables you to hit it where you want. his reply annoyed me.

"i have to aim straight. if i dont then at Yorkshire coaching they'll tell me off for aiming to the right."

all the coaches care about is how the swing looks. if his swing matched up with their video of adam scott on their laptop, thats all that mattered. even if he hit the ball better with his "incorrect" way of setting up.

players are over coached nowadays. i've heard it said it happens over the pond. but i think it happens over here as well. i watched a regional junior comp with some of the best juniors from the area. they have all received similar coaching from the same coaches throughout their development. and surprise surprise, they all look VERY similar. even for someone with my well trained eye ;):cool: struggled to see much difference between them all.

they all swing too far to the right. they all have a delayed pivot with resticted hip turn and strong grips.

i hate the way nowadays people value looks over substance. in the olden days players learnt a swing which hit the ball best. not which looked the best. if what looked the best actually WAS the best then Steve Elkington and Jonathan Bryd would have beaten Nicklaus' record many years ago IMO

rant over
Click to expand...

I agree, the notion of going for looks over efficiency is stupid since golf is not a beauty contest. All of these golf teachers who are heavily into a swing looking good would get destroyed by Jim Furyk or even funnier Allen Doyle in actual competition. Which I find really amusing. After Allen Doyle beats them he should sarcastically tell them to teach their students to swing like him.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CC4hgHucPY4
 
Last edited:
K

Kevin Shields

Super Moderator
Chris Sturgess said:
And why would they hold amateur status high? What is the legitimate reason for that? Because Bobby Jones was an amateur? That was almost 100 years ago now, professional golf was a joke back then. Now it's big business. They might as well make everybody wear a tie and play with a mashie niblick. I would say their only reason is the selfish one of those entities saving a million dollars or so by not paying them. It's clearly not what's best for Danny Lee.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying they're right. But if you get exempt for their event by winning an AMATEUR event, they want you in the field as an amateur. There might not be a legitimate reason for anything they do. But Bobby Jones founded the Masters (which is not big business) and the USGA governs the game mostly based on the amateurs. What's the big deal. If Danny Lee wants to turn down the invites, go right ahead.
 
C

Chris Sturgess

New member
The "big deal" is that for no reason at all Danny Lee has to put his professional career on hold for a year to play in those events (nobody in their right mind would turn down eligibility to play in the 3 biggest tournaments in the world). It just makes no sense.

The Masters is not big business? They let CBS cover their tournament for free? The winner doesn't get paid over a million dollars? Bobby Jones played in a completely different era that is not applicable anymore, it was almost 100 years ago. The USGA doesn't get paid for the US Open either I guess. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
L

LiftOff

New
It's the old form over function. Do you want to look good or score well?

Long time ago I went to a pro and he asked me what the problem was. Told him I just didn't 'look' right. He asked the question above. Of course my answer was 'score well'.

That day was the end of me worrying about what I looked like.
 
M

mb6606

New
You are dead wrong about the US Tennis academies - an example nearly every great American player (along with many foreigners) has spent time at Bolleteri's in Bradenton.
A list below:

Andre Agassi Boris Becker Paul Annacone
Pete Sampras Bjorn Borg Nicholas Pereira
Jim Courier Brian Gottfried Fabiola Zuluaga
Martina Hingis Jimmy Arias Pablo Arraya
Venus Williams Marcelo Rios Aaron Krickstein
Serena Williams Alexandra Stevenson Max Mirnyi
Monica Seles Mauricio Hadad Lisa Bonder
Anna Kournikova Rafaella Reggi Pam Casale
Tommy Haas David Wheaton Mirjana Lucic
Mary Pierce Carling Bassett-Seguso Sandra Cacic
Petra Korda Tim Mayotte Andre Sa
Xavier Malisse Thomas Enqvist Mark Phillippoussis
Mary Joe Fernandez Iva Majoli Caroline Vis
Anke Huber Maria Sharapova Daniela Hantuchova
Tatiana Golovin Paul-Henri Mathieu Jelena Jankovic
Caroline Vis Nicole Vaidisova
 
M

mb6606

New
IMG acadamies in Bradenton are 50% foreigeners. They have the $70-80,000 per year to send their kids. How many Americans can afford this? The ones that can obvisouly have nice comfortable life styles that might not require them to be as hungry or competitive.
 
K

Kevin Shields

Super Moderator
Chris Sturgess said:
The "big deal" is that for no reason at all Danny Lee has to put his professional career on hold for a year to play in those events (nobody in their right mind would turn down eligibility to play in the 3 biggest tournaments in the world). It just makes no sense.

The Masters is not big business? They let CBS cover their tournament for free? The winner doesn't get paid over a million dollars? Bobby Jones played in a completely different era that is not applicable anymore, it was almost 100 years ago. The USGA doesn't get paid for the US Open either I guess. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

The Masters is about tradition. They were going to do the event a few years back without sponsors. It could be 1000 years later and the tournament would still be about Bobby Jones, an amateur. What's so hard to understand about wanting amateurs to play as amateurs?
 
dashfan87

dashfan87

New
I think that if you win an amateur event, it wouldn't be fair to the professionals, to then allow that amateur to turn professional, and use that amateur win, as a way to then make money playing in majors.
there is your answer.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top