Joel Dahmen accuses Kang of cheating

1171820222336

Comments

  • lowheellowheel LOWHEEL Members Posts: 6,139 ✭✭
    MtlJeff wrote:


    Has it come out yet that Michael Klock is Joel Dahmen's illegitimate adult son yet? I was waiting for that shoe to drop.



    If you link different articles all citing the same witness, does that mean there were more witnesses? I'm also unclear on that.




    tumblr_o16n2kBlpX1ta3qyvo1_1280.jpg
  • sekrahsekrah Members Posts: 853 ✭✭
    lowheel wrote:


    [quote/]

    Why? So if a guy goes on and on to my face saying he saw me stab someone to death but never called me a murderer in the moment, then goes on Twitter when asked what the altercation was about and says "Clint murdered someone" he's somehow a coward? That makes zero sense (and I truly don't believe you think it adds up or matters either). Dahmen was clearly strong in the moment and Kang had to know what the accusation was. But I am fine with letting it go from here as it really is a bizarre and insignificant point to get hung on here when analyzing the situation as a whole (speaking for myself as well).




    You know exactly what youre doing and youre being semantic, pedantic and purposely obtuse. There is no point in continuing this back and forth since youre so invested in denying reality. Dahmen did not call him a cheater to his face. Kang is not american and english is his second language. If you trust he picked up Dahmens exact meaning from "if you can sleep at night" then why was he so surprised the day after that Dahmen would say such a taboo word? you know non native speakers dont get all or nearly any idiums/colloquial soliloquies right? listen to his interview to get a better grasp of his english. its possible that this is a misunderstanding between 2 grown men you know?



    [/quote]



    It's actually pretty obvious to anyone with a brain that Dahman was calling Kang a cheater right to his face. You just choose to be semantic, pedantic, and purposely obtuse about the entire situation.
  • lowheellowheel LOWHEEL Members Posts: 6,139 ✭✭
    edited Jul 11, 2018 #574
    sekrah wrote:

    lowheel wrote:


    [quote/]

    Why? So if a guy goes on and on to my face saying he saw me stab someone to death but never called me a murderer in the moment, then goes on Twitter when asked what the altercation was about and says "Clint murdered someone" he's somehow a coward? That makes zero sense (and I truly don't believe you think it adds up or matters either). Dahmen was clearly strong in the moment and Kang had to know what the accusation was. But I am fine with letting it go from here as it really is a bizarre and insignificant point to get hung on here when analyzing the situation as a whole (speaking for myself as well).




    You know exactly what youre doing and youre being semantic, pedantic and purposely obtuse. There is no point in continuing this back and forth since youre so invested in denying reality. Dahmen did not call him a cheater to his face. Kang is not american and english is his second language. If you trust he picked up Dahmens exact meaning from "if you can sleep at night" then why was he so surprised the day after that Dahmen would say such a taboo word? you know non native speakers dont get all or nearly any idiums/colloquial soliloquies right? listen to his interview to get a better grasp of his english. its possible that this is a misunderstanding between 2 grown men you know?






    It's actually pretty obvious to anyone with a brain that Dahman was calling Kang a cheater right to his face. You just choose to be semantic, pedantic, and purposely obtuse about the entire situation.

    [/quote]



    Like a moth to a flame.... you poor soul. "I know you are but what am I is a brilliant strategy". Good god man take the L and walk away, its embarrassing at this point.
  • sekrahsekrah Members Posts: 853 ✭✭
    edited Jul 11, 2018 #575
    lowheel wrote:

    sekrah wrote:

    lowheel wrote:


    [quote/]

    Why? So if a guy goes on and on to my face saying he saw me stab someone to death but never called me a murderer in the moment, then goes on Twitter when asked what the altercation was about and says "Clint murdered someone" he's somehow a coward? That makes zero sense (and I truly don't believe you think it adds up or matters either). Dahmen was clearly strong in the moment and Kang had to know what the accusation was. But I am fine with letting it go from here as it really is a bizarre and insignificant point to get hung on here when analyzing the situation as a whole (speaking for myself as well).




    You know exactly what youre doing and youre being semantic, pedantic and purposely obtuse. There is no point in continuing this back and forth since youre so invested in denying reality. Dahmen did not call him a cheater to his face. Kang is not american and english is his second language. If you trust he picked up Dahmens exact meaning from "if you can sleep at night" then why was he so surprised the day after that Dahmen would say such a taboo word? you know non native speakers dont get all or nearly any idiums/colloquial soliloquies right? listen to his interview to get a better grasp of his english. its possible that this is a misunderstanding between 2 grown men you know?






    It's actually pretty obvious to anyone with a brain that Dahman was calling Kang a cheater right to his face. You just choose to be semantic, pedantic, and purposely obtuse about the entire situation.




    Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah.

    [/quote]



    Like a moth to a flame.... you poor soul. "I know you are but what am I is a brilliant strategy". Good god man take the L and walk away, its embarrassing at this point.
  • chivachiva Members Posts: 2,477 ✭✭
    lowheel wrote:

    sekrah wrote:

    lowheel wrote:


    [quote/]

    Why? So if a guy goes on and on to my face saying he saw me stab someone to death but never called me a murderer in the moment, then goes on Twitter when asked what the altercation was about and says "Clint murdered someone" he's somehow a coward? That makes zero sense (and I truly don't believe you think it adds up or matters either). Dahmen was clearly strong in the moment and Kang had to know what the accusation was. But I am fine with letting it go from here as it really is a bizarre and insignificant point to get hung on here when analyzing the situation as a whole (speaking for myself as well).




    You know exactly what youre doing and youre being semantic, pedantic and purposely obtuse. There is no point in continuing this back and forth since youre so invested in denying reality. Dahmen did not call him a cheater to his face. Kang is not american and english is his second language. If you trust he picked up Dahmens exact meaning from "if you can sleep at night" then why was he so surprised the day after that Dahmen would say such a taboo word? you know non native speakers dont get all or nearly any idiums/colloquial soliloquies right? listen to his interview to get a better grasp of his english. its possible that this is a misunderstanding between 2 grown men you know?






    It's actually pretty obvious to anyone with a brain that Dahman was calling Kang a cheater right to his face. You just choose to be semantic, pedantic, and purposely obtuse about the entire situation.




    Like a moth to a flame.... you poor soul. "I know you are but what am I is a brilliant strategy". Good god man take the L and walk away, its embarrassing at this point.

    [/quote]



    The only thing embarrassing about this entire thread is how oblivious you are to the facts. Please continue to ignore them and proclaim Kang a saint. I'm glad JD was trying to protect the field and the integrity/outcome of the tournament.
    OB and water hazards you flunkies
  • NPVWhizNPVWhiz Members Posts: 1,976 ✭✭
    edited Jul 11, 2018 #577
    Several of you keep using the word fact as though it is something that one can simply declare into existence.
    Taylormade r11s 9 Penley Stealth 70x 44.5" D-3
    > Taylormade 16 M1 8.5 GD AD TP6x 44.0" D3 PX Hzrdus Black 75 6.0 44.5" D-3
    Nickent 3DX Pro 14 MRC Diamana WB 83s
    Hybrid: Adams Idea Pro 18 Grafalloy CNote ProtoX
    Mizuno MP62 DG x-100 Sensicore D-4 3-pw
    > Ping i200 DG120 S3 D-3 +1/4" Red 4-U.
    Vokey SM6 56-14/60-04M DG x-100 Sensicore 1xss D-5
    > Vokey SM6 56/10 60/4M DG 120 S300 35" D-5
    Scotty Golo
  • lowheellowheel LOWHEEL Members Posts: 6,139 ✭✭
    chiva wrote:

    lowheel wrote:

    sekrah wrote:

    lowheel wrote:


    [quote/]

    Why? So if a guy goes on and on to my face saying he saw me stab someone to death but never called me a murderer in the moment, then goes on Twitter when asked what the altercation was about and says "Clint murdered someone" he's somehow a coward? That makes zero sense (and I truly don't believe you think it adds up or matters either). Dahmen was clearly strong in the moment and Kang had to know what the accusation was. But I am fine with letting it go from here as it really is a bizarre and insignificant point to get hung on here when analyzing the situation as a whole (speaking for myself as well).




    You know exactly what youre doing and youre being semantic, pedantic and purposely obtuse. There is no point in continuing this back and forth since youre so invested in denying reality. Dahmen did not call him a cheater to his face. Kang is not american and english is his second language. If you trust he picked up Dahmens exact meaning from "if you can sleep at night" then why was he so surprised the day after that Dahmen would say such a taboo word? you know non native speakers dont get all or nearly any idiums/colloquial soliloquies right? listen to his interview to get a better grasp of his english. its possible that this is a misunderstanding between 2 grown men you know?






    It's actually pretty obvious to anyone with a brain that Dahman was calling Kang a cheater right to his face. You just choose to be semantic, pedantic, and purposely obtuse about the entire situation.




    Like a moth to a flame.... you poor soul. "I know you are but what am I is a brilliant strategy". Good god man take the L and walk away, its embarrassing at this point.




    The only thing embarrassing about this entire thread is how oblivious you are to the facts. Please continue to ignore them and proclaim Kang a saint. I'm glad JD was trying to protect the field and the integrity/outcome of the tournament.

    [/quote]



    What "facts" am i being oblivious to? Do you mean hyperbole and opinions? because if so those arent facts. Also dig up my post that says "Kang is a saint". Ill get my popcorn ready as i watch you twist yourself into knots trying to prove your statement. ( hint, you wont be able to)

    Cant wait to see the mental gymnastics image/smile.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':)' />



    2duikw.jpg
  • lowheellowheel LOWHEEL Members Posts: 6,139 ✭✭
    NPVWhiz wrote:


    Several of you keep using the word fact as though it is something that one can simply declare into existence.




    Its a fascinating thing to see thats for sure!!!
  • lowheellowheel LOWHEEL Members Posts: 6,139 ✭✭
    edited Jul 11, 2018 #580
    sekrah wrote:

    lowheel wrote:

    sekrah wrote:

    lowheel wrote:


    [quote/]

    Why? So if a guy goes on and on to my face saying he saw me stab someone to death but never called me a murderer in the moment, then goes on Twitter when asked what the altercation was about and says "Clint murdered someone" he's somehow a coward? That makes zero sense (and I truly don't believe you think it adds up or matters either). Dahmen was clearly strong in the moment and Kang had to know what the accusation was. But I am fine with letting it go from here as it really is a bizarre and insignificant point to get hung on here when analyzing the situation as a whole (speaking for myself as well).




    You know exactly what youre doing and youre being semantic, pedantic and purposely obtuse. There is no point in continuing this back and forth since youre so invested in denying reality. Dahmen did not call him a cheater to his face. Kang is not american and english is his second language. If you trust he picked up Dahmens exact meaning from "if you can sleep at night" then why was he so surprised the day after that Dahmen would say such a taboo word? you know non native speakers dont get all or nearly any idiums/colloquial soliloquies right? listen to his interview to get a better grasp of his english. its possible that this is a misunderstanding between 2 grown men you know?






    It's actually pretty obvious to anyone with a brain that Dahman was calling Kang a cheater right to his face. You just choose to be semantic, pedantic, and purposely obtuse about the entire situation.




    Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah.




    Like a moth to a flame.... you poor soul. "I know you are but what am I is a brilliant strategy". Good god man take the L and walk away, its embarrassing at this point.

    [/quote]



    Were you "baited" into answering again or are you here of your own free will? youre coming off very...



    giphy.gif



    Lifes is too short man get some air.
  • bscinstnctbscinstnct Members Posts: 26,381 ✭✭
    lowheel wrote:

    NPVWhiz wrote:


    Several of you keep using the word fact as though it is something that one can simply declare into existence.




    Its a fascinating thing to see thats for sure!!!




    How you figure a shot link volunteer says,



    "He (Kang) sure did cheat. I was running ShotLink on the green. That ball never came close to entering up where he dropped… Should’ve been 200 yards back. Told your caddie who told the rules official but Kang threw a fit and got his way.



    --- ShotLink volunteer Michael Klock talking to PGA Tour pro Joel Dahmen"



    https://www.golfmagic.com/golf-news/sung-kang-cheating-plot-thickens-after-shotlink-volunteers-comment



    Not easy to dismiss this



    Independent testimony!



    Ok, Im done



    Wait



  • lowheellowheel LOWHEEL Members Posts: 6,139 ✭✭
    edited Jul 11, 2018 #582
    bscinstnct wrote:

    lowheel wrote:

    NPVWhiz wrote:


    Several of you keep using the word fact as though it is something that one can simply declare into existence.




    Its a fascinating thing to see thats for sure!!!




    How you figure a shot link volunteer says,



    "He (Kang) sure did cheat. I was running ShotLink on the green. That ball never came close to entering up where he dropped… Should've been 200 yards back. Told your caddie who told the rules official but Kang threw a fit and got his way.



    --- ShotLink volunteer Michael Klock talking to PGA Tour pro Joel Dahmen"



    https://www.golfmagi...unteers-comment



    Not easy to dismiss this



    Independent testimony!



    Ok, Im done



    Wait



    [media=]




    Guys a volunteer and at the green but not on the line and no expert by any means. he certainly has the right to his opinion but his word in this scenario means nothing as it was not solicited by the players involved. When you make yourself a part of the story its always suspicious. If kang asked volunteers, gallery members or playing partners because he wasnt sure then it matters but he didnt as he was "certain in his mind". Its a bad look for all those involved but it was ruled on so the rest of the gossip girl stuff is bad for the game. because these rulings happen all the time and are interpretation calls and thats the risk that comes with them.If the tour really suspected foul play they would have penalized him even after the round. Its happened before. With all the info they gathered they deemed it was all good. My personal opinion is i give both guys the benefit of the doubt. Im sure they both feel theyre correct but i object to how dhamen handled it after the round which confuses his intentions/motivations in my eyes. Again just my opinion. I am very wary of those types of guys that shake your hand and smile and 30 seconds later badmouth you online. Have a good one BSC
  • Nixhex524Nixhex524 ClubWRX Posts: 4,005 ClubWRX
    Lowheel, I typically love what you post and agree with a lot of it on this forum, but to say that Kang had "nothing to gain" is just not even close to any sort of truth. Of course he had a couple hundred thousand and a spot in the Open to gain, no? No one is going to change anyone's mind here, I get that, but if Kang had nothing to gain, why be so adamant about his drop spot? These guys all have something to gain on Sunday.... Personally I don't care how Dahmen words it, in my opinion he was calling Kang a cheater on the course whether he used the word or not, but I do agree he should have refused to sign the score card and let the RO do it. It's your opinion that social media not be used to argue the circumstances or call people out but isn't that what we are ALL doing on a daily basis here, yourself included multiple times in this thread alone? It's not like Dahmen can do this and walk away from it, he's going to come across Kang many times from here on out, and I am sure he knows that, still, it didn't stop him from posting it. I just don't think it's as cowardly as you are making it out to be, or as passive aggressive.
    Taylormade M2 2017 9.5* Tensei Blue 
    Mizuno ST180 15* Tensei blue
    Titleist 816 H1 19*  Fujikura Motore 8.8 TS
    Srixon Z745 4-P PX 5.5 flighted
    Titleist SM5 50/56
    Odyssey PT2
    Srixon Z Star XV
  • lowheellowheel LOWHEEL Members Posts: 6,139 ✭✭
    edited Jul 11, 2018 #585
    Nixhex524 wrote:


    Lowheel, I typically love what you post and agree with a lot of it on this forum, but to say that Kang had "nothing to gain" is just not even close to any sort of truth. Of course he had a couple hundred thousand and a spot in the Open to gain, no? No one is going to change anyone's mind here, I get that, but if Kang had nothing to gain, why be so adamant about his drop spot? These guys all have something to gain on Sunday.... Personally I don't care how Dahmen words it, in my opinion he was calling Kang a cheater on the course whether he used the word or not, but I do agree he should have refused to sign the score card and let the RO do it. It's your opinion that social media not be used to argue the circumstances or call people out but isn't that what we are ALL doing on a daily basis here, yourself included multiple times in this thread alone? It's not like Dahmen can do this and walk away from it, he's going to come across Kang many times from here on out, and I am sure he knows that, still, it didn't stop him from posting it. I just don't think it's as cowardly as you are making it out to be, or as passive aggressive.




    I appreciate your response and opinion.For starters if kang was this nefarious mastermind **** bent on making at worse 6 on that par 5 he failed miserably.. were talking about 160 yards of difference here.it doesnt add up to me that he would risk his entire professional reputation on that single instance. his card was secure for next year before he even pegged his ball on the first hole. he was in the open already.guys made 6 million on tour. his motivations matter in this context. In my view its circumstantial at best. I gave both guys my open mind. Where we disagree i think is that you dont use fighting words online that you wouldnt use in person. Thats how i was raised at least. Real men dont do that. you might feel "dahmen said that in his own way" but didnt use the word he used on twitter. Big difference in my book. maybe not it yours and thats fine but putting on a virtue signalling clinic after the fact reflects worse on him than Kang in my eyes.

    If you think Dahmen put thought into what he posted after the round then we simply disagree. Im not on any social media and dont go around calling people out as you suggest were doing here. Im simply having a semi civilized discussion about my opinion on the matter and how dahmen handled it. im am perturbed that people on here keep using semantic circular logic and call it factual. My question for you is what do you make of the language barrier between Kang and Dahmen? or the fact that kang waxed him by 7 shots on that day? he was actually beating him by eight by the time they reached that hole and i believe the personal nature of dahmens comments shows his cards.
  • chivachiva Members Posts: 2,477 ✭✭
    lowheel wrote:

    Nixhex524 wrote:


    Lowheel, I typically love what you post and agree with a lot of it on this forum, but to say that Kang had "nothing to gain" is just not even close to any sort of truth. Of course he had a couple hundred thousand and a spot in the Open to gain, no? No one is going to change anyone's mind here, I get that, but if Kang had nothing to gain, why be so adamant about his drop spot? These guys all have something to gain on Sunday.... Personally I don't care how Dahmen words it, in my opinion he was calling Kang a cheater on the course whether he used the word or not, but I do agree he should have refused to sign the score card and let the RO do it. It's your opinion that social media not be used to argue the circumstances or call people out but isn't that what we are ALL doing on a daily basis here, yourself included multiple times in this thread alone? It's not like Dahmen can do this and walk away from it, he's going to come across Kang many times from here on out, and I am sure he knows that, still, it didn't stop him from posting it. I just don't think it's as cowardly as you are making it out to be, or as passive aggressive.




    I appreciate your response and opinion.For starters if kang was this nefarious mastermind **** bent on making at worse 6 on that par 5 he failed miserably.. were talking about 160 yards of difference here.it doesnt add up to me that he would risk his entire professional reputation on that single instance. his card was secure for next year before he even pegged his ball on the first hole. he was in the open already.guys made 6 million on tour. his motivations matter in this context. In my view its circumstantial at best. I gave both guys my open mind. Where we disagree i think is that you dont use fighting words online that you wouldnt use in person. Thats how i was raised at least. Real men dont do that. you might feel "dahmen said that in his own way" but didnt use the word he used on twitter. Big difference in my book. maybe not it yours and thats fine but putting on a virtue signalling clinic after the fact reflects worse on him than Kang in my eyes.

    If you think Dahmen put thought into what he posted after the round then we simply disagree. Im not on any social media and dont go around calling people out as you suggest were doing here. Im simply having a semi civilized discussion about my opinion on the matter and how dahmen handled it. im am perturbed that people on here keep using semantic circular logic and call it factual. My question for you is what do you make of the language barrier between Kang and Dahmen? or the fact that kang waxed him by 7 shots on that day? he was actually beating him by eight by the time they reached that hole and i believe the personal nature of dahmens comments shows his cards.




    You've made a lot of assumptions trying to justify why Kang didn't need to or want to cheat via a bad drop. Many of us on here have stated that Kang had every reason to cheat via a bad drop. Granted, those are assumptions as well. However, I think those assumptions are significantly more likely than the assumptions you have made. It's obvious we will not change each other's minds, so therefore we can agree to disagree.

    OB and water hazards you flunkies
  • Nixhex524Nixhex524 ClubWRX Posts: 4,005 ClubWRX
    lowheel wrote:

    Nixhex524 wrote:


    Lowheel, I typically love what you post and agree with a lot of it on this forum, but to say that Kang had "nothing to gain" is just not even close to any sort of truth. Of course he had a couple hundred thousand and a spot in the Open to gain, no? No one is going to change anyone's mind here, I get that, but if Kang had nothing to gain, why be so adamant about his drop spot? These guys all have something to gain on Sunday.... Personally I don't care how Dahmen words it, in my opinion he was calling Kang a cheater on the course whether he used the word or not, but I do agree he should have refused to sign the score card and let the RO do it. It's your opinion that social media not be used to argue the circumstances or call people out but isn't that what we are ALL doing on a daily basis here, yourself included multiple times in this thread alone? It's not like Dahmen can do this and walk away from it, he's going to come across Kang many times from here on out, and I am sure he knows that, still, it didn't stop him from posting it. I just don't think it's as cowardly as you are making it out to be, or as passive aggressive.




    I appreciate your response and opinion.For starters if kang was this nefarious mastermind **** bent on making at worse 6 on that par 5 he failed miserably.. were talking about 160 yards of difference here.it doesnt add up to me that he would risk his entire professional reputation on that single instance. his card was secure for next year before he even pegged his ball on the first hole. he was in the open already.guys made 6 million on tour. his motivations matter in this context. In my view its circumstantial at best. I gave both guys my open mind. Where we disagree i think is that you dont use fighting words online that you wouldnt use in person. Thats how i was raised at least. Real men dont do that. you might feel "dahmen said that in his own way" but didnt use the word he used on twitter. Big difference in my book. maybe not it yours and thats fine but putting on a virtue signalling clinic after the fact reflects worse on him than Kang in my eyes.

    If you think Dahmen put thought into what he posted after the round then we simply disagree. Im not on any social media and dont go around calling people out as you suggest were doing here. Im simply having a semi civilized discussion about my opinion on the matter and how dahmen handled it. im am perturbed that people on here keep using semantic circular logic and call it factual. My question for you is what do you make of the language barrier between Kang and Dahmen? or the fact that kang waxed him by 7 shots on that day? he was actually beating him by eight by the time they reached that hole and i believe the personal nature of dahmens comments shows his cards.




    I won't claim to know all the details of what was said throughout the day between the 2. I wouldn't say there is much of an understanding barrier anywhere with Kang. In my opinion he seems to know that his drop was a stretch at best. "95% isn't 100%". That statement alone says a lot to me. He's admitting and leaving himself an out in the future. Why not "be a man" and just say he was 100% sure? Cause he wasn't, he doubted even his own call while still trying to protect his reputation. Maybe the spot in the Open was given, but being higher on the leaderboard has to carry some weight or why would these guys compete the way they do? Sure, maybe Dahmen was getting mopped but so what? That's why, to me, it's not Kang that has nothing to gain, but Dahmen. Even if the Volunteers were "Dahmens guys", what do THEY stand to gain from it? I would say it takes a lot more guts to do what Dahmen did by even calling him out then to do what Kang did and take a drop when he wasn't even completely sure of where it crossed. We can agree to disagree and keep discussing but I have to say, the more I think about this the more Kang seems on the hook here.
    Taylormade M2 2017 9.5* Tensei Blue 
    Mizuno ST180 15* Tensei blue
    Titleist 816 H1 19*  Fujikura Motore 8.8 TS
    Srixon Z745 4-P PX 5.5 flighted
    Titleist SM5 50/56
    Odyssey PT2
    Srixon Z Star XV
  • lowheellowheel LOWHEEL Members Posts: 6,139 ✭✭
    chiva wrote:

    lowheel wrote:

    Nixhex524 wrote:


    Lowheel, I typically love what you post and agree with a lot of it on this forum, but to say that Kang had "nothing to gain" is just not even close to any sort of truth. Of course he had a couple hundred thousand and a spot in the Open to gain, no? No one is going to change anyone's mind here, I get that, but if Kang had nothing to gain, why be so adamant about his drop spot? These guys all have something to gain on Sunday.... Personally I don't care how Dahmen words it, in my opinion he was calling Kang a cheater on the course whether he used the word or not, but I do agree he should have refused to sign the score card and let the RO do it. It's your opinion that social media not be used to argue the circumstances or call people out but isn't that what we are ALL doing on a daily basis here, yourself included multiple times in this thread alone? It's not like Dahmen can do this and walk away from it, he's going to come across Kang many times from here on out, and I am sure he knows that, still, it didn't stop him from posting it. I just don't think it's as cowardly as you are making it out to be, or as passive aggressive.




    I appreciate your response and opinion.For starters if kang was this nefarious mastermind **** bent on making at worse 6 on that par 5 he failed miserably.. were talking about 160 yards of difference here.it doesnt add up to me that he would risk his entire professional reputation on that single instance. his card was secure for next year before he even pegged his ball on the first hole. he was in the open already.guys made 6 million on tour. his motivations matter in this context. In my view its circumstantial at best. I gave both guys my open mind. Where we disagree i think is that you dont use fighting words online that you wouldnt use in person. Thats how i was raised at least. Real men dont do that. you might feel "dahmen said that in his own way" but didnt use the word he used on twitter. Big difference in my book. maybe not it yours and thats fine but putting on a virtue signalling clinic after the fact reflects worse on him than Kang in my eyes.

    If you think Dahmen put thought into what he posted after the round then we simply disagree. Im not on any social media and dont go around calling people out as you suggest were doing here. Im simply having a semi civilized discussion about my opinion on the matter and how dahmen handled it. im am perturbed that people on here keep using semantic circular logic and call it factual. My question for you is what do you make of the language barrier between Kang and Dahmen? or the fact that kang waxed him by 7 shots on that day? he was actually beating him by eight by the time they reached that hole and i believe the personal nature of dahmens comments shows his cards.




    You've made a lot of assumptions trying to justify why Kang didn't need to or want to cheat via a bad drop. Many of us on here have stated that Kang had every reason to cheat via a bad drop. Granted, those are assumptions as well. However, I think those assumptions are significantly more likely than the assumptions you have made. It's obvious we will not change each other's minds, so therefore we can agree to disagree.




    And thats the crux of it. youre convinced your assumptions are "more likely" than mine and that doesnt bother me in the least. Inherit bias is a real thing. Dahmens people wouldnt go against him if it was a 50/50 situation which it clearly was and thats alright as well so for me the "eye witness accounts" are not super reliable when you see that they are outside the ropes nowhere near the line of the shot. As you concluded we can agree to disagree but please remember my biggest beef in this story was strictly with dahmens behavior post round. take care
  • lowheellowheel LOWHEEL Members Posts: 6,139 ✭✭
    edited Jul 12, 2018 #589
    Nixhex524 wrote:

    lowheel wrote:

    Nixhex524 wrote:


    Lowheel, I typically love what you post and agree with a lot of it on this forum, but to say that Kang had "nothing to gain" is just not even close to any sort of truth. Of course he had a couple hundred thousand and a spot in the Open to gain, no? No one is going to change anyone's mind here, I get that, but if Kang had nothing to gain, why be so adamant about his drop spot? These guys all have something to gain on Sunday.... Personally I don't care how Dahmen words it, in my opinion he was calling Kang a cheater on the course whether he used the word or not, but I do agree he should have refused to sign the score card and let the RO do it. It's your opinion that social media not be used to argue the circumstances or call people out but isn't that what we are ALL doing on a daily basis here, yourself included multiple times in this thread alone? It's not like Dahmen can do this and walk away from it, he's going to come across Kang many times from here on out, and I am sure he knows that, still, it didn't stop him from posting it. I just don't think it's as cowardly as you are making it out to be, or as passive aggressive.




    I appreciate your response and opinion.For starters if kang was this nefarious mastermind **** bent on making at worse 6 on that par 5 he failed miserably.. were talking about 160 yards of difference here.it doesnt add up to me that he would risk his entire professional reputation on that single instance. his card was secure for next year before he even pegged his ball on the first hole. he was in the open already.guys made 6 million on tour. his motivations matter in this context. In my view its circumstantial at best. I gave both guys my open mind. Where we disagree i think is that you dont use fighting words online that you wouldnt use in person. Thats how i was raised at least. Real men dont do that. you might feel "dahmen said that in his own way" but didnt use the word he used on twitter. Big difference in my book. maybe not it yours and thats fine but putting on a virtue signalling clinic after the fact reflects worse on him than Kang in my eyes.

    If you think Dahmen put thought into what he posted after the round then we simply disagree. Im not on any social media and dont go around calling people out as you suggest were doing here. Im simply having a semi civilized discussion about my opinion on the matter and how dahmen handled it. im am perturbed that people on here keep using semantic circular logic and call it factual. My question for you is what do you make of the language barrier between Kang and Dahmen? or the fact that kang waxed him by 7 shots on that day? he was actually beating him by eight by the time they reached that hole and i believe the personal nature of dahmens comments shows his cards.




    I won't claim to know all the details of what was said throughout the day between the 2. I wouldn't say there is much of an understanding barrier anywhere with Kang. In my opinion he seems to know that his drop was a stretch at best. "95% isn't 100%". That statement alone says a lot to me. He's admitting and leaving himself an out in the future. Why not "be a man" and just say he was 100% sure? Cause he wasn't, he doubted even his own call while still trying to protect his reputation. Maybe the spot in the Open was given, but being higher on the leaderboard has to carry some weight or why would these guys compete the way they do? Sure, maybe Dahmen was getting mopped but so what? That's why, to me, it's not Kang that has nothing to gain, but Dahmen. Even if the Volunteers were "Dahmens guys", what do THEY stand to gain from it? I would say it takes a lot more guts to do what Dahmen did by even calling him out then to do what Kang did and take a drop when he wasn't even completely sure of where it crossed. We can agree to disagree and keep discussing but I have to say, the more I think about this the more Kang seems on the hook here.




    Thats cool man, like i said its your call. In my book it doesnt take guts to oppose or question a players drop during the round. if your motives are pure youre actually helping the player not just protecting the field.I believe when kang made the 95% comment the official made the right decision by telling him thats not 100% because it forced him to make sure and give it a second look. he actually asked the official to drive him back to take another look at it. Doesnt sound like some elaborate scheme to me. When he drove back he told the official he was certain and proceeded to take his drop. he was 3 under for the day at that point and dhamen was 4 or 5 over. Im not trying to change your mind, Im explaining based on what i know I dont see the diabolical intent and that matters because motive is everything. Kang was given the green light by the official so for me it was over. Where we disagree is that theres a man code that was broken in my opinion. I wont budge on that. When golfdigest calls it the c word you know its bad and thats why he waited when he was safely away from kang to say that online like a true keyboard warrior. Id take it back if it came out that he did say that but we both know he didnt say it because he himself said so that all he said was " if you can sleep at night". Always a pleasure take care
  • CasualLieCasualLie Do Woodchucks Chuck Wood? Members Posts: 1,403 ✭✭
    As I tried to post many pages ago, but perhaps didn't do that great of a job, is along the same lines. It's bush league for Dahmen to go down the cheater route on twitter regardless of anything else said and done prior to that. People go on Twitter to get the re-tweets and followers, it is as simple as that, so for Dahmen to try to rally a crowd that way shows zero class. Maybe I missed it in another thread, or maybe it is too sensitive, but there is also a race factor. If Dahmen can call Kang a cheater on Twitter than someone else can call him the "r" word towards Kang.



    I don't hold it against Dahmen in the long run, it's far from the first time someone went to Twitter without thinking. In fact, it is pretty much standard fare from leaders, no? It sure likes sour grapes from Dahmen. Motivated by what? Who knows. Could be he has something against Koreans, could be he has seen these types of drops one too many times and he blew his top, could be his bad play that day, maybe he signed the card and it is done and over with in his mind until after he had a few drinks and got angry again...so many possibilities. As we all know golf can drive you mad. It's just unfortunate that Dahmen didn't get his temporary madness under control before jumping on Twitter because it changes the whole tone of conversation away from Kang to some journeyman ranting cheater.
  • Ashley SchaefferAshley Schaeffer Members Posts: 2,010 ✭✭
    CasualLie wrote:


    As I tried to post many pages ago, but perhaps didn't do that great of a job, is along the same lines. It's bush league for Dahmen to go down the cheater route on twitter regardless of anything else said and done prior to that. People go on Twitter to get the re-tweets and followers, it is as simple as that, so for Dahmen to try to rally a crowd that way shows zero class. Maybe I missed it in another thread, or maybe it is too sensitive, but there is also a race factor. If Dahmen can call Kang a cheater on Twitter than someone else can call him the "r" word towards Kang.



    I don't hold it against Dahmen in the long run, it's far from the first time someone went to Twitter without thinking. In fact, it is pretty much standard fare from leaders, no? It sure likes sour grapes from Dahmen. Motivated by what? Who knows. Could be he has something against Koreans, could be he has seen these types of drops one too many times and he blew his top, could be his bad play that day, maybe he signed the card and it is done and over with in his mind until after he had a few drinks and got angry again...so many possibilities. As we all know golf can drive you mad. It's just unfortunate that Dahmen didn't get his temporary madness under control before jumping on Twitter because it changes the whole tone of conversation away from Kang to some journeyman ranting cheater.




    Um . . . what?
    8.5* TS3 - Evenflow White T-1100
    15* M2 2017
    18* M2 2017
    4-PW Mizuno JPX850F
    SM7 50*, 54*, 60*
    SC Newport Two
  • lowheellowheel LOWHEEL Members Posts: 6,139 ✭✭
    edited Jul 12, 2018 #592
    CasualLie wrote:


    As I tried to post many pages ago, but perhaps didn't do that great of a job, is along the same lines. It's bush league for Dahmen to go down the cheater route on twitter regardless of anything else said and done prior to that. People go on Twitter to get the re-tweets and followers, it is as simple as that, so for Dahmen to try to rally a crowd that way shows zero class. Maybe I missed it in another thread, or maybe it is too sensitive, but there is also a race factor. If Dahmen can call Kang a cheater on Twitter than someone else can call him the "r" word towards Kang.



    I don't hold it against Dahmen in the long run, it's far from the first time someone went to Twitter without thinking. In fact, it is pretty much standard fare from leaders, no? It sure likes sour grapes from Dahmen. Motivated by what? Who knows. Could be he has something against Koreans, could be he has seen these types of drops one too many times and he blew his top, could be his bad play that day, maybe he signed the card and it is done and over with in his mind until after he had a few drinks and got angry again...so many possibilities. As we all know golf can drive you mad. It's just unfortunate that Dahmen didn't get his temporary madness under control before jumping on Twitter because it changes the whole tone of conversation away from Kang to some journeyman ranting cheater.




    Wow very well said. I think you articulated some things better than I could. Your last sentence is the real story here which is a shame.
  • jallen0119jallen0119 Members Posts: 42
    lowheel wrote:

    CasualLie wrote:


    As I tried to post many pages ago, but perhaps didn't do that great of a job, is along the same lines. It's bush league for Dahmen to go down the cheater route on twitter regardless of anything else said and done prior to that. People go on Twitter to get the re-tweets and followers, it is as simple as that, so for Dahmen to try to rally a crowd that way shows zero class. Maybe I missed it in another thread, or maybe it is too sensitive, but there is also a race factor. If Dahmen can call Kang a cheater on Twitter than someone else can call him the "r" word towards Kang.



    I don't hold it against Dahmen in the long run, it's far from the first time someone went to Twitter without thinking. In fact, it is pretty much standard fare from leaders, no? It sure likes sour grapes from Dahmen. Motivated by what? Who knows. Could be he has something against Koreans, could be he has seen these types of drops one too many times and he blew his top, could be his bad play that day, maybe he signed the card and it is done and over with in his mind until after he had a few drinks and got angry again...so many possibilities. As we all know golf can drive you mad. It's just unfortunate that Dahmen didn't get his temporary madness under control before jumping on Twitter because it changes the whole tone of conversation away from Kang to some journeyman ranting cheater.




    Wow very well said. I think you articulated some things better than I could. Your last sentence is the real story here which is a shame.




    He was asked what took him so long to play the hole by a friend/follower. He answered the question. It's really simple.



    The only person who thinks Dahmen posting his thoughts on Twitter "is the real story" is you. Everyone else realizes this this the 21st century and people use social media to communicate. You don't have to challenge someone to a duel in order to solve an issue.
  • johndagolferjohndagolfer Members Posts: 76 ✭✭
    jallen0119 wrote:

    lowheel wrote:

    CasualLie wrote:


    As I tried to post many pages ago, but perhaps didn't do that great of a job, is along the same lines. It's bush league for Dahmen to go down the cheater route on twitter regardless of anything else said and done prior to that. People go on Twitter to get the re-tweets and followers, it is as simple as that, so for Dahmen to try to rally a crowd that way shows zero class. Maybe I missed it in another thread, or maybe it is too sensitive, but there is also a race factor. If Dahmen can call Kang a cheater on Twitter than someone else can call him the "r" word towards Kang.



    I don't hold it against Dahmen in the long run, it's far from the first time someone went to Twitter without thinking. In fact, it is pretty much standard fare from leaders, no? It sure likes sour grapes from Dahmen. Motivated by what? Who knows. Could be he has something against Koreans, could be he has seen these types of drops one too many times and he blew his top, could be his bad play that day, maybe he signed the card and it is done and over with in his mind until after he had a few drinks and got angry again...so many possibilities. As we all know golf can drive you mad. It's just unfortunate that Dahmen didn't get his temporary madness under control before jumping on Twitter because it changes the whole tone of conversation away from Kang to some journeyman ranting cheater.




    Wow very well said. I think you articulated some things better than I could. Your last sentence is the real story here which is a shame.




    He was asked what took him so long to play the hole by a friend/follower. He answered the question. It's really simple.



    The only person who thinks Dahmen posting his thoughts on Twitter "is the real story" is you. Everyone else realizes this this the 21st century and people use social media to communicate. You don't have to challenge someone to a duel in order to solve an issue.




    i don't think anyone has said anything about the medium used to convey the message. Calling a fellow competitor a "cheat" with no measurable evidence is what blew up this whole situation (apparently here more than any other place, since I haven't seen too much more mention of it elsewhere online). He could have simply said we had a disagreement about where the ball crossed and left at that.
  • BottleCapBottleCap Members Posts: 1,322 ✭✭
    CasualLie wrote:


    As I tried to post many pages ago, but perhaps didn't do that great of a job, is along the same lines. It's bush league for Dahmen to go down the cheater route on twitter regardless of anything else said and done prior to that. People go on Twitter to get the re-tweets and followers, it is as simple as that, so for Dahmen to try to rally a crowd that way shows zero class. Maybe I missed it in another thread, or maybe it is too sensitive, but there is also a race factor. If Dahmen can call Kang a cheater on Twitter than someone else can call him the "r" word towards Kang.



    I don't hold it against Dahmen in the long run, it's far from the first time someone went to Twitter without thinking. In fact, it is pretty much standard fare from leaders, no? It sure likes sour grapes from Dahmen. Motivated by what? Who knows. Could be he has something against Koreans, could be he has seen these types of drops one too many times and he blew his top, could be his bad play that day, maybe he signed the card and it is done and over with in his mind until after he had a few drinks and got angry again...so many possibilities. As we all know golf can drive you mad. It's just unfortunate that Dahmen didn't get his temporary madness under control before jumping on Twitter because it changes the whole tone of conversation away from Kang to some journeyman ranting cheater.




    This is very offensive, it's not a group of Koreans that cheated, it's an individual named Sung Kang that did.
    Titleist TS2 GD TourAD DI 7S
    Titleist 917 F3 GD TourAD IZ 8S
    Mizuno MP-18 MMC 3-4 DG AMT S300
    Mizuno MP-18 5-PW DG S400
    Vokey SM7 54M and 60M
    Cameron Newport 2 CT
    Bridgestone Tour B XS
  • jonsnowjonsnow GeorgiaMembers Posts: 1,231 ✭✭
    It's a shame we didn't have Twitter at the Wall. We'd have known those pesky White Walkers were on the way a lot sooner...
    WITB:
    Titleist 910D3 9.5
    Titleist 917F2 15
    Titleist 910H 19
    Bridgestone J40 DPC 4-PW
    Vokey SM6 50,54,60
    Cameron Newport 2
    Bridgestone Tour B XS

    Clubs are subject to disciplinary action up to and including termination at any time...
  • new2g0lfnew2g0lf Members Posts: 3,382 ✭✭
    edited Jul 12, 2018 #597
    I'm convinced Dahmen believes Kang cheated but the PGA Tour officials do not and that's what matters. Once the cheating allegations were made I'm sure the PGA Tour and local officials tried to find evidence that Kang intentionally cheated but were not able to get real substantiated proof. Maybe if this happened on Day 2 or 3 the PGA would have had more time but given this happened on the last day towards the end of the tournament there wasn't much that could be done with regards to rulings once the tournament ended.



    The Tour officials on the scene approved of the drop and later defended Kangs actions. To my knowledge they have no reason to defend or protect Kang so it's likely the evidence provided was not substantial enough to prove he cheated and in these instances, innocent until proven guilty is the guiding principle.



    As for Dahmen, he made his case to the Tour officials, they disagreed or valued the word of Kang over Dahmen. Dahmen gained some followers and notoriety but overall he comes off looking bitter for choking on the last day. If there was clear video that proved his case he'd be justified in calling Kang a cheater but given it's one guys word versus another he should have handled the situation better and said nothing.



    Fans, volunteers, Shot Link operators and all the patrons do not get a say in rulings and I place zero value on what they said happened. We have no idea what their motivations are, fame, financial gain, personal grudge, etc so when non-officials weigh in on their observations of a controversial event after the fact where there is no video proof to back up their statements, I discount everything they say.
    Post edited by Unknown User on
    Driver - Ping G400 MAX 10.5*
    Woods - XXIO 10 3W
    Hybrids - XXIO 10 3H, 4H, 5H
    Irons - Home - PXG Gen 2 0311P 5-GW Away - Ping i500 5-AW
    Wedge - Vokey TVD 56* K Grind
    Putter - Seemore Nashville mFGP2 SS Mallet Black
    Ball - KSig, TM TP5X, Snell MTB
  • NPVWhizNPVWhiz Members Posts: 1,976 ✭✭
    edited Jul 12, 2018 #598
    bscinstnct wrote:

    lowheel wrote:

    NPVWhiz wrote:


    Several of you keep using the word fact as though it is something that one can simply declare into existence.




    Its a fascinating thing to see thats for sure!!!




    How you figure a shot link volunteer says,



    "He (Kang) sure did cheat. I was running ShotLink on the green. That ball never came close to entering up where he dropped… Should've been 200 yards back. Told your caddie who told the rules official but Kang threw a fit and got his way.



    --- ShotLink volunteer Michael Klock talking to PGA Tour pro Joel Dahmen"



    https://www.golfmagi...unteers-comment



    Not easy to dismiss this



    Independent testimony!



    Ok, Im done



    Wait



    [media=]




    I'll make the case that the young volunteer shotlink guy may have had no better angle on the shot than Dahmen did, but it sounds like neither did he have the maturity or presence of mind to ask himself whether his perspective should hold sway over Kang's perspective...and by Kang's perspective I do mean both his physical perspective on the shot and his mental perspective on the process.



    There are too many people in this world that just need to step back (and no, I do not think you are one of them, and I hope I'm not either image/biggrin.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':D' />) , because there are 8 lonely numbers between 1 and 10. Dahmen picked up his phone, spent a brief instant at 1, then jumped straight to 10. That's almost always a bad idea. A good, solid 5 or 6 would have sufficed. Once you've hit 10, there is no place else to go. And that's where Dahmen finds himself on this one. No place else to go.



    Having the skills to properly run a Shotlink laser is not the same as having the skills to evaluate when you should reserve judgment on a topic or matter. Every Curly, Larry and Moe wants their 15 minutes.



    I'm quite confident that there are guys out on Tour that would rather not draw Dahmen as a pairing, not so much for the specifics of calling someone a cheater, but for showing the poor judgment and loose cannon element of his own personality. And that's the way it should be. If you put Kang in a position where in future pairings, some other tour player treats him poorly, then you shouldn't expect there to be zero consequence to that. The thing is, Kang will be aware of it. But Dahmen probably won't because those players will probably just politely keep him at a chit-chat distance and hope they get out of the round without him going to twitter to out them for picking their nose on Hole 12.



    I may not have made it as clear in other posts, but I'm reasonably of the opinion that Kang may have been wrong about his own evaluation of where the ball last crossed the margin. I'm opposed to tar and feathering him on Twitter with the cheater label, when it's much easier and more civil and gentlemanly to give him the benefit of the doubt. If I knew Kang was a known cheater from the Asian Tour, having been penalized, fined and DQ'd definitively for offenses, I'd obviously feel differently and with good reason.



    But still, after all of this, I believe that it's more likely that Kang is a good guy that may or may not have made a mistake than Dahmen is a great guy to have a beer with. I wouldn't want my sister to date a guy that takes to Twitter to call people cheaters. But then again, I don't have a sister.
    Post edited by Unknown User on
    Taylormade r11s 9 Penley Stealth 70x 44.5" D-3
    > Taylormade 16 M1 8.5 GD AD TP6x 44.0" D3 PX Hzrdus Black 75 6.0 44.5" D-3
    Nickent 3DX Pro 14 MRC Diamana WB 83s
    Hybrid: Adams Idea Pro 18 Grafalloy CNote ProtoX
    Mizuno MP62 DG x-100 Sensicore D-4 3-pw
    > Ping i200 DG120 S3 D-3 +1/4" Red 4-U.
    Vokey SM6 56-14/60-04M DG x-100 Sensicore 1xss D-5
    > Vokey SM6 56/10 60/4M DG 120 S300 35" D-5
    Scotty Golo
  • RobS14526RobS14526 Members Posts: 1,127 ✭✭
    One thing I find amazing is that they both played the round at 3 under par after the incident. I’m surprised that one, if not both, didn’t come unglued. Kudos to the caddies!
  • bscinstnctbscinstnct Members Posts: 26,381 ✭✭
    jonsnow wrote:


    It's a shame we didn't have Twitter at the Wall. We'd have known those pesky White Walkers were on the way a lot sooner...




    Unfotunately, the white walkers were the ones with the Tweeters. That's how they got the drop on Viserion!





    viserion-down.gif
  • wcbjrwcbjr Members Posts: 2,789 ✭✭
    This thread is like the one on Nippon shafts, it just keeps going and going.
This discussion has been closed.