Yes

TigerMomTigerMom Members Posts: 223 ✭✭

Comments

  • BertGABertGA Members Posts: 270 ✭✭
    "I am here to tell you that if you want to use a sport to help in your application, then golf is the worst sport you can play (whereas basketball, football, hockey or lacrosse are the best). "
  • TigerMomTigerMom Members Posts: 223 ✭✭
    BertGA wrote:


    "I am here to tell you that if you want to use a sport to help in your application, then golf is the worst sport you can play (whereas basketball, football, hockey or lacrosse are the best). "




    his numbers are probably right



    but too bad you need the right genes to play college in those sports, even for women



    silly comparison
  • wildcatdenwildcatden China Cat Sunflower Members Posts: 832 ✭✭
    BertGA wrote:


    "I am here to tell you that if you want to use a sport to help in your application, then golf is the worst sport you can play (whereas basketball, football, hockey or lacrosse are the best). "




    Sounds like reverse psychology to me. image/biggrin.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':D' />
  • heavy_hitterheavy_hitter Members Posts: 3,019 ✭✭
    wildcatden wrote:

    BertGA wrote:


    "I am here to tell you that if you want to use a sport to help in your application, then golf is the worst sport you can play (whereas basketball, football, hockey or lacrosse are the best). "




    Sounds like reverse psychology to me. image/biggrin.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':D' />



    TigerMom wrote:

    BertGA wrote:


    "I am here to tell you that if you want to use a sport to help in your application, then golf is the worst sport you can play (whereas basketball, football, hockey or lacrosse are the best). "




    his numbers are probably right



    but too bad you need the right genes to play college in those sports, even for women



    silly comparison




    Sounds like you are stereotyping to me. Makes me wonder.
  • jj9000jj9000 ClubWRX Posts: 2,609 ClubWRX
    OP...trying to understand your motives here.



    Are you looking for validation relative to you pushing your kid in a certain direction...with your desired outcome being the end-game?
  • BertGABertGA Members Posts: 270 ✭✭
    wildcatden wrote:

    BertGA wrote:


    "I am here to tell you that if you want to use a sport to help in your application, then golf is the worst sport you can play (whereas basketball, football, hockey or lacrosse are the best). "




    Sounds like reverse psychology to me. image/biggrin.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':D' />




    Classic. In fact, maybe TigerMom = Brendan Ryan.
  • TigerMomTigerMom Members Posts: 223 ✭✭

    wildcatden wrote:

    BertGA wrote:


    "I am here to tell you that if you want to use a sport to help in your application, then golf is the worst sport you can play (whereas basketball, football, hockey or lacrosse are the best). "




    Sounds like reverse psychology to me. image/biggrin.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':D' />



    TigerMom wrote:

    BertGA wrote:


    "I am here to tell you that if you want to use a sport to help in your application, then golf is the worst sport you can play (whereas basketball, football, hockey or lacrosse are the best). "




    his numbers are probably right



    but too bad you need the right genes to play college in those sports, even for women



    silly comparison




    Sounds like you are stereotyping to me. Makes me wonder.




    what stereo?



    got to be big, tall, strong, fast to play those sports with hardly any exception



    not absolutely necessary in golf



    just look at lpga tour players - many of best are not greatest physical specimens
  • tiger1873tiger1873 Members Posts: 1,018 ✭✭
    If you want to go to Harvard, Yale or Stanford or just about any IVY league then sports and surprising I come to find out even academics is not a sure path. I multiple parents who have sent their kids these schools and worked with gads from there.



    The underlying factor is most of the kids that got in went to super expensive elite private schools. Schools that costs maybe 40k a year to go to in tuition. Then if you have a hard time getting in throw the school some money for junior.
  • TigerMomTigerMom Members Posts: 223 ✭✭
    jj9000 wrote:


    OP...trying to understand your motives here.



    Are you looking for validation relative to you pushing your kid in a certain direction...with your desired outcome being the end-game?




    I just thought it was interesting article



    must have minimum academics, then compete among that pool of players (who actually want to go)



    very few spots (2-3 per year per team? maybe more since many drop out of Ivy golf later) but very few qualify academically



    seems like golf not as great due to weather and heavy workload (studying in college?)



    information is good
  • iteachgolfiteachgolf Members Posts: 16,601 ✭✭
    TigerMom wrote:

    BertGA wrote:


    "I am here to tell you that if you want to use a sport to help in your application, then golf is the worst sport you can play (whereas basketball, football, hockey or lacrosse are the best). "




    his numbers are probably right



    but too bad you need the right genes to play college in those sports, even for women



    silly comparison




    Don’t have to be very big to play hockey or lacrosse at all. Certainly no more so than golf
  • Exwinger20Exwinger20 Members Posts: 34 ✭✭
    iteachgolf wrote:

    TigerMom wrote:

    BertGA wrote:


    "I am here to tell you that if you want to use a sport to help in your application, then golf is the worst sport you can play (whereas basketball, football, hockey or lacrosse are the best). "




    his numbers are probably right



    but too bad you need the right genes to play college in those sports, even for women



    silly comparison




    Don’t have to be very big to play hockey or lacrosse at all. Certainly no more so than golf




    As a former D1 and professional hockey player I can attest to this being true.
  • TigerMomTigerMom Members Posts: 223 ✭✭
    iteachgolf wrote:

    TigerMom wrote:

    BertGA wrote:


    "I am here to tell you that if you want to use a sport to help in your application, then golf is the worst sport you can play (whereas basketball, football, hockey or lacrosse are the best). "




    his numbers are probably right



    but too bad you need the right genes to play college in those sports, even for women



    silly comparison




    Don’t have to be very big to play hockey or lacrosse at all. Certainly no more so than golf




    running (skating) speed over short distances is highly genetic
  • iteachgolfiteachgolf Members Posts: 16,601 ✭✭
    TigerMom wrote:

    iteachgolf wrote:

    TigerMom wrote:

    BertGA wrote:


    "I am here to tell you that if you want to use a sport to help in your application, then golf is the worst sport you can play (whereas basketball, football, hockey or lacrosse are the best). "




    his numbers are probably right



    but too bad you need the right genes to play college in those sports, even for women



    silly comparison




    Don’t have to be very big to play hockey or lacrosse at all. Certainly no more so than golf




    running (skating) speed over short distances is highly genetic




    No it’s not. It can be taught and trained quite easily. My brother played D1 lacrosse and ran about a 5.2 40. I played hockey for 11 years.
  • Exwinger20Exwinger20 Members Posts: 34 ✭✭
    TigerMom wrote:

    iteachgolf wrote:

    TigerMom wrote:

    BertGA wrote:


    "I am here to tell you that if you want to use a sport to help in your application, then golf is the worst sport you can play (whereas basketball, football, hockey or lacrosse are the best). "




    his numbers are probably right



    but too bad you need the right genes to play college in those sports, even for women



    silly comparison




    Don't have to be very big to play hockey or lacrosse at all. Certainly no more so than golf




    running (skating) speed over short distances is highly genetic




    Absolutely hockey players are (like all other top tier athletes) born not made.
  • kekoakekoa ClubWRX Posts: 8,789 ClubWRX
    Show of hands.



    Lets say your junior was smart and an absolute phenom in golf? How many of you would send them to an Ivy league school? Harvard, Yale, etc.... Note that Stanford isn't Ivy League.
  • jj9000jj9000 ClubWRX Posts: 2,609 ClubWRX
    kekoa wrote:


    Show of hands.



    Lets say your junior was smart and an absolute phenom in golf? How many of you would send them to an Ivy league school? Harvard, Yale, etc.... Note that Stanford isn't Ivy League.




    Define 'absolute phenom'.



    Absolute phenom in the sense that they have the ability to make a living playing golf --> I would recommend a 'golf-centric' OK. St. like program.



    Absolute phenom in the sense that they are very very good, but will likely work in a traditional job capacity after college --> I would recommend Ivy.



    Ultimately the decision would be made by the child though. I'm not going to force what I want them to do on them. I'll encourage, with facts.



    If they don't want to go whichever route...for whatever reason...there's no amount of convincing that will make up for the lack of passion (academically or athletically).
  • iteachgolfiteachgolf Members Posts: 16,601 ✭✭
    Vanderbilt or Stanford would be a way better option for anyone looking to pursue golf professionally
  • RangerVRangerV My ProV’s are frozen Members Posts: 172 ✭✭
    kekoa wrote:
    Show of hands.



    Lets say your junior was smart and an absolute phenom in golf? How many of you would send them to an Ivy league school? Harvard, Yale, etc.... Note that Stanford isn't Ivy League.


    If my kid was a phenom and smart, they could go wherever they wanted. I didn’t get the good grades or shoot the low scores, and I’m not the one that is going to college, doing homework, living away from home, or playing golf. Except for financial reasons, parents are there to answer questions, not make decisions.
    TM M3 w/ Diamana Whiteboard 73X
    TM M2 Tour 3HL w/ Diamana Blueboard 83X
    Mizuno Mp FliHi Cut Muscle w/ GD Tour AD 95X
    Mizuno Mp59 w/ TI DG X100
    Titleist Vokey SM7 Brushed Steel 50/55/60 w/ TI DG S400
    Ping Vault 2.0 Stealth Anser
  • BertGABertGA Members Posts: 270 ✭✭
    RangerV wrote:

    kekoa wrote:
    Show of hands.



    Lets say your junior was smart and an absolute phenom in golf? How many of you would send them to an Ivy league school? Harvard, Yale, etc.... Note that Stanford isn't Ivy League.


    If my kid was a phenom and smart, they could go wherever they wanted. I didn’t get the good grades or shoot the low scores, and I’m not the one that is going to college, doing homework, living away from home, or playing golf. Except for financial reasons, parents are there to answer questions, not make decisions.




    Exactly this
  • TigerMomTigerMom Members Posts: 223 ✭✭
    iteachgolf wrote:

    TigerMom wrote:

    iteachgolf wrote:

    TigerMom wrote:

    BertGA wrote:


    "I am here to tell you that if you want to use a sport to help in your application, then golf is the worst sport you can play (whereas basketball, football, hockey or lacrosse are the best). "




    his numbers are probably right



    but too bad you need the right genes to play college in those sports, even for women



    silly comparison




    Don’t have to be very big to play hockey or lacrosse at all. Certainly no more so than golf




    running (skating) speed over short distances is highly genetic




    No it’s not. It can be taught and trained quite easily. My brother played D1 lacrosse and ran about a 5.2 40. I played hockey for 11 years.




    Exwinger (who played pro) disagrees with you sorry
  • iteachgolfiteachgolf Members Posts: 16,601 ✭✭
    TigerMom wrote:

    iteachgolf wrote:

    TigerMom wrote:

    iteachgolf wrote:

    TigerMom wrote:




    his numbers are probably right



    but too bad you need the right genes to play college in those sports, even for women



    silly comparison




    Don’t have to be very big to play hockey or lacrosse at all. Certainly no more so than golf




    running (skating) speed over short distances is highly genetic




    No it’s not. It can be taught and trained quite easily. My brother played D1 lacrosse and ran about a 5.2 40. I played hockey for 11 years.




    Exwinger (who played pro) disagrees with you sorry




    Your sarcasm meter is broken
  • TigerMomTigerMom Members Posts: 223 ✭✭
    kekoa wrote:


    Show of hands.



    Lets say your junior was smart and an absolute phenom in golf? How many of you would send them to an Ivy league school? Harvard, Yale, etc.... Note that Stanford isn't Ivy League.




    Keoka,



    First you have to qualify academically



    Merely smart doesn’t cut it



    Have to be really great academically if you play niche sports like golf and tennis to get into top schools



    Academic Index self explanatory



    Junior golf phenom still has probably less than 10% chance to make it as touring pro



    Might as well aim for top schools



    Other great academic + golf include Duke, Northwestern, Cal Berkeley



    UVA and UNC are also ok academics



    If you want to get into high paid professional job best go to school with good brand recognition for academics
  • TigerMomTigerMom Members Posts: 223 ✭✭
    iteachgolf wrote:




    Your sarcasm meter is broken




    You cannot be (naturally) slow and small and uncoordinated and make it sorry



    Have to be outstanding in at least two and at worst average in third: size/strength, speed/agility, coordination/skill



    It’s the same in most sports



    You teach top players - why you argue with this?
  • iteachgolfiteachgolf Members Posts: 16,601 ✭✭
    edited Nov 14, 2018 #25
    TigerMom wrote:

    iteachgolf wrote:




    Your sarcasm meter is broken




    You cannot be (naturally) slow and small and uncoordinated and make it sorry



    Have to be outstanding in at least two and at worst average in third: size/strength, speed/agility, coordination/skill



    It’s the same in most sports



    You teach top players - why you argue with this?




    Speed/agility/ coordination can be taught and are learned skills. Nobody is born knowing how to walk let alone run/skate. Plenty of top lacrosse players are smaller than 5’10. Best attack and Defenseman on my brothers D1 team were both 5’7, the attack was maybe 140lbs. I’ve been a professional in 2 different sports and am 5’7.



    Yes I do teach top players and genetics have very little to do with their success. You’re trying to make excuses why kids fail and your doing so before they even have a chance.
  • TigerMomTigerMom Members Posts: 223 ✭✭
    iteachgolf wrote:

    TigerMom wrote:

    iteachgolf wrote:




    Your sarcasm meter is broken




    You cannot be (naturally) slow and small and uncoordinated and make it sorry



    Have to be outstanding in at least two and at worst average in third: size/strength, speed/agility, coordination/skill



    It’s the same in most sports



    You teach top players - why you argue with this?




    Speed/agility/ coordination can be taught and are learned skills. Nobody is born knowing how to walk let alone run/skate. Plenty of top lacrosse players are smaller than 5’10. Best attack and Defenseman on my brothers D1 team were both 5’7, the attack was maybe 140lbs. I’ve been a professional in 2 different sports and am 5’7.



    Yes I do teach top players and genetics have very little to do with their success. You’re trying to make excuses why kids fail and your doing so before they even have a chance.




    There are innate aptitudes for everything



    Just because you can become proficient at something through hard work doesn’t mean you can become really great



    The best athletes have great genes and work really hard too



    How can someone with less natural ability compete with someone who was “born with it” and busts butte



    This is not controversial
  • iteachgolfiteachgolf Members Posts: 16,601 ✭✭
    TigerMom wrote:

    iteachgolf wrote:

    TigerMom wrote:

    iteachgolf wrote:




    Your sarcasm meter is broken




    You cannot be (naturally) slow and small and uncoordinated and make it sorry



    Have to be outstanding in at least two and at worst average in third: size/strength, speed/agility, coordination/skill



    It’s the same in most sports



    You teach top players - why you argue with this?




    Speed/agility/ coordination can be taught and are learned skills. Nobody is born knowing how to walk let alone run/skate. Plenty of top lacrosse players are smaller than 5’10. Best attack and Defenseman on my brothers D1 team were both 5’7, the attack was maybe 140lbs. I’ve been a professional in 2 different sports and am 5’7.



    Yes I do teach top players and genetics have very little to do with their success. You’re trying to make excuses why kids fail and your doing so before they even have a chance.




    There are innate aptitudes for everything



    Just because you can become proficient at something through hard work doesn’t mean you can become really great



    The best athletes have great genes and work really hard too



    How can someone with less natural ability compete with someone who was “born with it” and busts butte



    This is not controversial




    Except that the things you claim people are born with aren’t genetic. They are learned.

  • TigerMomTigerMom Members Posts: 223 ✭✭
    iteachgolf wrote:

    TigerMom wrote:

    iteachgolf wrote:

    TigerMom wrote:

    iteachgolf wrote:




    Your sarcasm meter is broken




    You cannot be (naturally) slow and small and uncoordinated and make it sorry



    Have to be outstanding in at least two and at worst average in third: size/strength, speed/agility, coordination/skill



    It’s the same in most sports



    You teach top players - why you argue with this?




    Speed/agility/ coordination can be taught and are learned skills. Nobody is born knowing how to walk let alone run/skate. Plenty of top lacrosse players are smaller than 5’10. Best attack and Defenseman on my brothers D1 team were both 5’7, the attack was maybe 140lbs. I’ve been a professional in 2 different sports and am 5’7.



    Yes I do teach top players and genetics have very little to do with their success. You’re trying to make excuses why kids fail and your doing so before they even have a chance.




    There are innate aptitudes for everything



    Just because you can become proficient at something through hard work doesn’t mean you can become really great



    The best athletes have great genes and work really hard too



    How can someone with less natural ability compete with someone who was “born with it” and busts butte



    This is not controversial




    Except that the things you claim people are born with aren’t genetic. They are learned.




    Running fast and big size are not learned



    Even strength has limitations
  • iteachgolfiteachgolf Members Posts: 16,601 ✭✭
    TigerMom wrote:

    iteachgolf wrote:

    TigerMom wrote:

    iteachgolf wrote:

    TigerMom wrote:




    You cannot be (naturally) slow and small and uncoordinated and make it sorry



    Have to be outstanding in at least two and at worst average in third: size/strength, speed/agility, coordination/skill



    It’s the same in most sports



    You teach top players - why you argue with this?




    Speed/agility/ coordination can be taught and are learned skills. Nobody is born knowing how to walk let alone run/skate. Plenty of top lacrosse players are smaller than 5’10. Best attack and Defenseman on my brothers D1 team were both 5’7, the attack was maybe 140lbs. I’ve been a professional in 2 different sports and am 5’7.



    Yes I do teach top players and genetics have very little to do with their success. You’re trying to make excuses why kids fail and your doing so before they even have a chance.




    There are innate aptitudes for everything



    Just because you can become proficient at something through hard work doesn’t mean you can become really great



    The best athletes have great genes and work really hard too



    How can someone with less natural ability compete with someone who was “born with it” and busts butte



    This is not controversial




    Except that the things you claim people are born with aren’t genetic. They are learned.




    Running fast and big size are not learned



    Even strength has limitations




    Running reasonably fast is learned. And again big size isn’t necessary. The average collegiate lacrosse player is 5’11 and 185lbs. UNC’s top scorer in school history is 5’5. One of Villanova’s top players in last decade was 5’4 and 140lbs. It’s obvious you don’t understand the game at all. Again my brother was a top lacrosse player in the state of FL and was 5’9 and 175lbs in high school. And he’s actually quite slow running. He understands the game and is almost always in the right place at the right time and won 88% of his face offs his senior season. He learned to be skillful but is not a great athlete.
  • heavy_hitterheavy_hitter Members Posts: 3,019 ✭✭
    kekoa wrote:
    Show of hands.



    Lets say your junior was smart and an absolute phenom in golf? How many of you would send them to an Ivy league school? Harvard, Yale, etc.... Note that Stanford isn't Ivy League.




    I would not. Not to get political, but Ivy League schools tend to indoctrinate kids into beliefs that I don’t agree with.
  • theboypinoytheboypinoy Members Posts: 2,038 ✭✭
    edited Nov 14, 2018 #31

    kekoa wrote:
    Show of hands.



    Lets say your junior was smart and an absolute phenom in golf? How many of you would send them to an Ivy league school? Harvard, Yale, etc.... Note that Stanford isn't Ivy League.




    I would not. Not to get political, but Ivy League schools tend to indoctrinate kids into beliefs that I don’t agree with.




    As an Ivy League alum, never saw any of this, both at the university I went to and among friends I had at the others.
Sign In or Register to comment.