About Jordan's 100-yard-right drive vs some of the great Major collapses...

[North Texas]

No room for comments on a scorecard.....

 

I don't believe a guy holding the trophy at the end of a 72 hole tourney "collapsed"......

 

I didn't call Jordan's Hole a collapse. I'm wondering how the shot compares to shots that caused collapses.

 

Please read this reply, if you didn't see it.

 

I never said Jordan's wild tee shot was a collapse.

 

Who really knows what you said. That nearly 1000 word screed was unreadable.

 

His 10 word posts can also be unreadable.

[JunkerJorge]

Spieth's reaction while the ball was in the air did not indicate a "slight" miss. I don't buy for a second he wasn't aiming for the FW.

 

Thinking about it more, as far as a collapse, Rory's debacle on Sunday was certainly a collapse at the Masters, as well as Jordan's at the '16 Masters.

 

I can't remember. Did Rory continue to crash and burn after #10, or did he rebound and nearly win anyway?

 

Serious question. Not being snarky. I'm getting old.

 

Shot 80 I think.

[ConcentricDimples]

Didn't he say something about his target being the middle of the right rough? So does that make his 100 yard miss more like 50?

 

Seriously OP thinks he knows where Spieth was aiming. SMFH

 

You're not Jordan's caddie or coach either. SMFH.

 

It is possible you are Jordan Spieth himself, though, in which case you could SAY you were aiming 100 yards right and you pre-planned the whole thing.

[ex0dus]

Didn't he say something about his target being the middle of the right rough? So does that make his 100 yard miss more like 50?

 

Seriously OP thinks he knows where Spieth was aiming. SMFH

 

You're not Jordan's caddie or coach either. SMFH.

 

It is possible you are Jordan Spieth himself, though, in which case you could SAY you were aiming 100 yards right and you pre-planned the whole thing.

 

I didn't say I was. I am not the one making the claim that I know where Jordan was aiming. You are the one pretending that you know where he was aiming and how far off line his drive went, when in fact you are clueless about both.

 

However it certainly looked like he was aiming where Kucher's drive ended up, the right rough, and hit it right of where he was aiming. He also said he was aiming in the rough to avoid the pot bunker on the left, but I know you wont let the facts get in the way of your trolling.

[ConcentricDimples]

Didn't he say something about his target being the middle of the right rough? So does that make his 100 yard miss more like 50?

 

Seriously OP thinks he knows where Spieth was aiming. SMFH

 

You're not Jordan's caddie or coach either. SMFH.

 

It is possible you are Jordan Spieth himself, though, in which case you could SAY you were aiming 100 yards right and you pre-planned the whole thing.

 

I didn't say I was. I am not the one making the claim that I know where Jordan was aiming. You are the one pretending that you know where he was aiming and how far off line his drive went, when in fact you are clueless about both.

 

However it certainly looked like he was aiming where Kucher's drive ended up, the right rough, and hit it right of where he was aiming. He also said he was aiming in the rough to avoid the pot bunker on the left, but I know you wont let the facts get in the way of your trolling.

 

 

I never said anything about him aiming anywhere; just where the ball ended up.

 

Don't tell me I'm trolling; my threads are no better or worse than anything in Tour Talk, and it sophomoric and bush-league to resort to characterizing someone's posts as "troll" posts or "trolling."

 

It's also pretty depressing and lame, since a bunch of random people's contribution to a discussion is calling me a troll, or stupid, or ignorant.

 

The simple fact is most people who do so are not capable of abstract thought and see a square and mutter: "square!", and all people who do so are hostile and inflammatory.

 

So, calling someone's posts "troll posts" actually says more about the poster than the recipient of the love. I think you are a troll. When I can get to a desktop I am placing you on my ignore list.

 

But thanks for taking the time to post, as always. Celebrating and including all types of people on the forum is what makes this place great.

 

Though if you want to generate some real cred, you might consider upping your game from copying a sentiment posted by numerous others. Kinda like the 25th chick showing up to prom with the same dress. It's time to find your own dress, padre.

[ex0dus]

Didn't he say something about his target being the middle of the right rough? So does that make his 100 yard miss more like 50?

 

Seriously OP thinks he knows where Spieth was aiming. SMFH

 

You're not Jordan's caddie or coach either. SMFH.

 

It is possible you are Jordan Spieth himself, though, in which case you could SAY you were aiming 100 yards right and you pre-planned the whole thing.

 

I didn't say I was. I am not the one making the claim that I know where Jordan was aiming. You are the one pretending that you know where he was aiming and how far off line his drive went, when in fact you are clueless about both.

 

However it certainly looked like he was aiming where Kucher's drive ended up, the right rough, and hit it right of where he was aiming. He also said he was aiming in the rough to avoid the pot bunker on the left, but I know you wont let the facts get in the way of your trolling.

 

 

I never said anything about him aiming anywhere; just where the ball ended up.

 

Don't tell me I'm trolling; my threads are no better or worse than anything in Tour Talk, and it sophomoric and bush-league to resort to characterizing someone's posts as "troll" posts or "trolling."

 

It's also pretty depressing and lame, since a bunch of random people's contribution to a discussion is calling me a troll, or stupid, or ignorant.

 

The simple fact is most people who do so are not capable of abstract thought and see a square and mutter: "square!", and all people who do so are hostile and inflammatory.

 

So, calling someone's posts "troll posts" actually says more about the poster than the recipient of the love. I think you are a troll. When I can get to a desktop I am placing you on my ignore list.

 

But thanks for taking the time to post, as always. Celebrating and including all types of people on the forum is what makes this place great.

 

Though if you want to generate some real cred, you might consider upping your game from copying a sentiment posted by numerous others. Kinda like the 25th chick showing up to prom with the same dress. It's time to find your own dress, padre.

 

 

When you say

 

"To conclude, I guess talking about 100-yard misses."

 

We obviously know he wasn't aiming where his ball finished, but let's assume he actually was aiming there. In that case it wouldn't be a miss at all.

 

You are making the assumption that you know where he was aiming and how far from that point the ball went when in fact you know neither, then wrote a TLDR essay on what it means. In fact Jordan was aiming right to avoid the pot bunker which obviously points out just how dumb the post was in the first place.

[ConcentricDimples]

 

Didn't he say something about his target being the middle of the right rough? So does that make his 100 yard miss more like 50?

 

Seriously OP thinks he knows where Spieth was aiming. SMFH

 

 

You're not Jordan's caddie or coach either. SMFH.

 

It is possible you are Jordan Spieth himself, though, in which case you could SAY you were aiming 100 yards right and you pre-planned the whole thing.

 

I didn't say I was. I am not the one making the claim that I know where Jordan was aiming. You are the one pretending that you know where he was aiming and how far off line his drive went, when in fact you are clueless about both.

 

However it certainly looked like he was aiming where Kucher's drive ended up, the right rough, and hit it right of where he was aiming. He also said he was aiming in the rough to avoid the pot bunker on the left, but I know you wont let the facts get in the way of your trolling.

 

 

I never said anything about him aiming anywhere; just where the ball ended up.

 

Don't tell me I'm trolling; my threads are no better or worse than anything in Tour Talk, and it sophomoric and bush-league to resort to characterizing someone's posts as "troll" posts or "trolling."

 

It's also pretty depressing and lame, since a bunch of random people's contribution to a discussion is calling me a troll, or stupid, or ignorant.

 

The simple fact is most people who do so are not capable of abstract thought and see a square and mutter: "square!", and all people who do so are hostile and inflammatory.

 

So, calling someone's posts "troll posts" actually says more about the poster than the recipient of the love. I think you are a troll. When I can get to a desktop I am placing you on my ignore list.

 

But thanks for taking the time to post, as always. Celebrating and including all types of people on the forum is what makes this place great.

 

Though if you want to generate some real cred, you might consider upping your game from copying a sentiment posted by numerous others. Kinda like the 25th chick showing up to prom with the same dress. It's time to find your own dress, padre.

 

 

When you say

 

"To conclude, I guess talking about 100-yard misses."

 

We obviously know he wasn't aiming where his ball finished, but let's assume he actually was aiming there. In that case it wouldn't be a miss at all.

 

You are making the assumption that you know where he was aiming and how far from that point the ball went when in fact you know neither.

 

And you are assuming the adjective miss implies distance from his aim line where it actually implies distance from the fairway/center of fairway, which one might see from reading my opening post.

[larrybud]

Spieth's reaction while the ball was in the air did not indicate a "slight" miss. I don't buy for a second he wasn't aiming for the FW.

 

Thinking about it more, as far as a collapse, Rory's debacle on Sunday was certainly a collapse at the Masters, as well as Jordan's at the '16 Masters.

 

I can't remember. Did Rory continue to crash and burn after #10, or did he rebound and nearly win anyway?

 

Serious question. Not being snarky. I'm getting old.

 

Well, he did shoot 80!

 

https://www.thenational.ae/sport/golf/mcilroy-blows-masters-chance-in-monumental-plunge-1.432773

[larrybud]

Ok. Here's what you're looking for. Colin Montgomery. Middle of 18th fairway at Winged Foot. 150yd fade 7iron to the 18th green from middle of the fairway. If he hits the green he wins. For a career fader, that's the easiest shot in the world.

 

Chunk fat stab into the front bunker. He makes bogey (double maybe?) and Ogilvy takes the title.

 

Is that really a collapse? Sure, a bad shot, but did he ever lead that tourney?

 

I think of collapse as big lead, then blows it.

[ex0dus]

And you are assuming the adjective miss implies distance from his aim line where it actually implies distance from the fairway/center of fairway, which one might see from reading my opening post.

 

In golf a ball that goes where you are aiming isn't considered a miss. This is pretty much common knowledge and generally doesn't need pointing out.

[JeffreySpicoli]

And you are assuming the adjective miss implies distance from his aim line where it actually implies distance from the fairway/center of fairway, which one might see from reading my opening post.

 

In golf a ball that goes where you are aiming isn't considered a miss. This is pretty much common knowledge and generally doesn't need pointing out.

 

This.

 

The middle of the fairway is not the de facto target.

[NoTalentLefty]

And you are assuming the adjective miss implies distance from his aim line where it actually implies distance from the fairway/center of fairway, which one might see from reading my opening post.

 

In golf a ball that goes where you are aiming isn't considered a miss. This is pretty much common knowledge and generally doesn't need pointing out.

 

This.

 

The middle of the fairway is not the de facto target.

 

For me, a mere mortal, it is but for that level you are correct.

[JeffreySpicoli]

And you are assuming the adjective miss implies distance from his aim line where it actually implies distance from the fairway/center of fairway, which one might see from reading my opening post.

 

In golf a ball that goes where you are aiming isn't considered a miss. This is pretty much common knowledge and generally doesn't need pointing out.

 

This.

 

The middle of the fairway is not the de facto target.

 

For me, a mere mortal, it is but for that level you are correct.

 

Oh, I don't know about that. I, too, am a mere mortal. I can't think of a course that I regularly play where always targeting the middle of the fairway would be prudent.

[Hawkeye77]

Jack won The Masters in '86, how does this compare with some of the great Masters collapses? Oh yes, he won. It doesn't.

[Darth Putter]

Jack won The Masters in '86, how does this compare with some of the great Masters collapses? Oh yes, he won. It doesn't.

 

3 putt choke job on #12 by Jack. Total meltdown.

 

His finish was better than Jordan's though since he had to pass half the Hall of Fame to win it.

[Hawkeye77]

Jack won The Masters in '86, how does this compare with some of the great Masters collapses? Oh yes, he won. It doesn't.

 

3 putt choke job on #12 by Jack. Total meltdown.

 

His finish was better than Jordan's though since he had to pass half the Hall of Fame to win it.

 

Spike mark!

[27x10.5]

It was just a bad swing doesn't require a thesis he still won