Jump to content

Soloman1

Advanced Members
  • Posts

    4,405
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    12

Everything posted by Soloman1

  1. Welcome... Random stuff is good sometimes, isn't it? Not that you would know . . . Ha!
  2. Are you talking about Martin Hall?
  3. Haha! Yes, they write the address starting with the yuubinbangou (zip code), then state, city, etc. and down to the name at the end. It goes from big to small. I had things delivered with just a zip code and my name, since the mail carrier knows everyone on the route. It was so weird to come back to the west where you have to read from bottom to top to figure out how to deliver something. The date system is more logical too. year/month/day. Again, big to small. Many people get confused when in the US or getting letters/ email with a date 2014/02/08. Japanese would expect it to be the 8th of February, but Americans would think the 2nd of August. WHYYYYYYY????? lol But they also use a different date system. The year resets with each new emperor. So a persons birthday and dates on government documents use that system. So the year 2000 in Japanese calendar was "平成 12" - 12th year of the "Heisei era" or 12th year of the reign of the previous emperor. That's why Japan didn't freakout over Y2K. I still have my Japanese drivers license. Now that, was an adventure to get. Japanese pay about US$ 3,000 for a drivers license...
  4. Here's something that could be frustrating in Japan. There was a street sign near my house which is very rare. Most streets have no names but some rare larger ones will have a number. The sign was: 大道 The first kanji means big and the second kanji means street or road. Kanji can many different pronunciations for the same character. one is the purely Japanese pronunciation and the other is from the old Chinese pronunciation. This first kanji could be pronounced as DAI or OH- (a long ohh). The second could be pronounced as MICHI or DORO or DOH. Anyway, taking a taxi from the train station, I would have to explain where to go. If I said, "DAI DOH." The taxi driver might say, "Ahhhh, Oh- michi..." just to fool with me. The next time with a different driver, If I said, "OH michi," he'd say,'Ahhh, dai doh..." Imagine driving in country with no street names... You carried a giant book of detailed maps and had to plot your route before you left. Store names, or trees, or stop lights would be landmarks to turn. That's why GPS car navigation was first introduced in Japan.
  5. There are a couple of things you can always count on - the press rarely gets anything right, and bureaucrats are worse.
  6. I didn't read it that way, but it might be. Hope you can get something free or reasonable.
  7. If you earn your livelihood using your body, why would you not want to repair/enhance it? Oh, wait... that's the motto of InstaGram.
  8. You're looking at information from July. This was announced on Tuesday this week: "Travellers will have to show proof that they have been fully vaccinated. Proof of vaccination verification will be part of the standard U.S. Customs and Border Protection process. Border officials will have the ability to send travellers to a secondary screening to have these documents checked, at the discretion of the officer. Individuals who do not have proof of full COVID-19 vaccination will not be allowed to travel for non-essential purposes. There is no requirement to show proof of a negative COVID-19 test to enter the U.S." Source: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/canada-us-land-border-crossing-covid-19-travel-rules-restrictions-150335485.html "The Canadian government has not announced any changes to the requirement for international travellers to show proof of a negative molecular COVID-19 test to enter Canada. Travellers arriving by car, bus, boat, ferry or train from the U.S. must take a molecular COVID-19 test within 72 hours of entry into Canada."
  9. No testing is necessary starting (some unknown date) next month. If you're vaccinated, you can enter. If you're not vaccinated, you cannot enter even with a test. Added: However, it seems Canada will still require a test to get back in. Walgreens drug store says the test is free and can be done at a drive through window. https://www.walgreens.com/findcare/covid19/testing?ban=covidfy21_newtestingpg_heroban
  10. No one. Only me in my strange brain.
  11. I wouldn't object if phone and internet service was shut down one day per week, except for 911 calls.
  12. Hi Pepper, Yes, that is what Dave Pelz says about putts on fast greens like those. I suggest you try your own experiment. Try a short putt on cement in your garage or on a wood floor and watch what happens near the end of the roll.
  13. He had an observation of an effect and an idea to reduce it, not a study to quantify it.
  14. - "The range of results 269 observed for the horizontal launch angle were -1.00 to 0.71°" - p11 - The experiment used a 12 foot putt, not a short putt. The entire premise of Pelz and others is that the low impact velocity of short putts on hard and fast greens, particularly downhill contributes to the effect and is greater when the player intent is to die the ball at the hole. This was clearly stated by Pelz. - This experiment did not observe or measure anything related to the effect as stated by Pelz and brought up by DeChambeau. - Longer putts, (e.g. 12 feet like the experiment) have little effect because of greater ball surface compression from the putter face and was never considered an issue to Pelz or by DeChambeau. This study has no relationship to the original problem. The problem was solved by hitting putts with more speed. ------------> In the "old days," golf balls had a seam and players aligned the seam vertically when putting as the intended location to contact the ball. There was no dimple effect because greens were so much slower. The slower the green, the faster the ball is traveling, the more compression at impact, negating any dimple effect. Mac O'Grady went down the putting rabbit hole deep enough to play with an 18" putter, the shortest club length allowed. It is a modern day problem that is solved by not trying to die short putts at the hole.
  15. The effect is also influenced by the speed of the green. Hard fast greens (wood floors?) and balls moving slowly (down hill) will wiggle as they slow just before stopping due to the dimples. If you have never seen that and played hard, fast greens, you aren't as observant as you might want to be. But, yes. Obviously weekend golfers aren't even close to being tuned into the nuances of golf as professionals or very elite amateurs are.
  16. People don't routinely hit the edge of the dimple and get the maximum deflection. That's a rarity. It's usually much less. The possibility is not the probability. I believe I said it was between zero and 1°. Also, the contour and grain will accentuate or negate the effect. As I said, it's kinda messy. Can it be as much as a 1" deflection at five feet? Sure. Not likely, but it can happen. But, it's flat and no cross grain and the target line was the center of the hole, it's still going in if it's within the delivery speed is OK. On a straight, flat 5 foot putt with a (rare) 1" deflection, the outside of the ball will be inside the edge by 1/8" so you're not going to miss. The PGA Tour record is 93 putts for a 72 hole tournament, one or two could be affected. The average is only 80% for 5 foot putts. I don't see it as a big problem either, because the odds of a 1° deflection are pretty low. But it isn't a non-existent phenomenon.
  17. Yeah, you guys are right. Those people researching the effect years ago were stupid. They should have asked y'all first. Oh wait, if you didn't know about it, how did they know about it? Must have been witchcraft. Who cares about a possible 1° deflection measured with video. Let's not make this about facts. And damn, what were those ball companies thinking years ago when they tested a ball with a symmetrical small flat spot for putting to try to address the effect since it's not true? Of course, the degradation of the ball flight was significant enough that it wasn't worth it. Everyone wants more distance. If it were true, which must not be, since it's all nonsense. Oh, did y'all hear about those ridiculous new ball flight laws? What morons. It's not true either. We all know that the balls starts on the line of the path and curves toward the face. That's why we close the face at impact to hook the ball. We've always done it that way. Science, schmience...
  18. You don't always hit the edge of the dimple. But, in case you do hit the edge (again, you don't do it every time), more momentum will flatten the edge enough to at least reduce the effect. In a game of variables, you try to reduce the variables. It's like risk management. A golf tournament is not one shot. It is four rounds of shots. That could be about 90+ putts. If you make one more out of those 90 putts because of something you're doing differently, it's a big deal. One shot, hit, throw in any sport at the right time can mean the difference in an inning, a game, a series, a season, a career and a franchise.
  19. I agree completely. We don't know how much of an impact it has on a particular putt. As far as other people talking about it, we don't know who or if any think about it or not. Some people know and do things without giving away their secrets... In the end, the answer seems more and more to be, "We don't know."
  20. I'm like one? Nothing is a simple as we'd all like it to be. Bryson changed his putting speed from 5 feet and less, not just 3 feet. He makes more now. Not all deflections and putts are equal. There is a range of deflection from none to over 1°. Not all putts are a flat read or with no cross grain. The intended line including grain and topographical break amplifies or reduces the deflection depending on the direction. The gear effect from the geometry of the face impact, can increase or decrease the deflection. The longer the putt, the more offline the putt will be at the hole from the initial deflection. That's pretty simple stuff there. One degree offline at impact is more at 20 feet than at 10 feet.
  21. But Baddeley drops to 87th place at 4 foot putts. Snedeker is 131st from 4 feet. Lahiri was 77th from 4 feet. Shall I go on?
  22. We don't know how much the dimple thing affected his missed putts, so there is no way to compare. His solution was to begin hitting those putts more firmly. Do the people ahead of him, hit more firmly, align better, read the line better, putt the face more squarely, impact with more or less AoA, use different balls with different dimple patterns, use different face materials, etc.? A lot of variables... Can it affect putts? Yes. Can ball design affect it? Yes. We could calculate the odds of it happening from measuring the geometry of the dimple pattern for a ball. I'm not going to do it, but maybe someone will. The real questions is how does he reduce that variable? Oh, it's a variable alright, but it's messy.
  23. Tour Balatas had a seam. You aligned the seam horizontally off the tee and vertically when putting. You made contact with the seam, not a dimple, when putting. That was unless you were a total whack job and couldn't putt a lick... like me.
×
×
  • Create New...