Krt22

As a 12 trending to a 19, if you are "intending to hit a draw or a fade" , well you should stop all that first and report back.

The accuracy of the book and the true influence of the book are 2 very different things. Make percentage at 25ft is very very low, make rate at that distance is much more reliant on execution and luck than knowing the exact break to the millimeter. PGA tour pros are good, but not that good to the point where a bit of more detailed info is going to lead to a make or no make. The subtle green contours (and speed) change daily. And they are not done by drone, at least not for the most popular version on tour.

lol, let me dust off my jump to conclusions mat. If we really want to test the players true mental skill, every single shot should be on a shot clock. All of the mental gymnastics some players do to find their mental focus is absurd

If you don't think the opinions of PGA tour players are constantly influenced by outside agencies, I am not sure what to tell you. If there was statistically significant data showing using a greens book provided players with an advantage vs not, I would 100% be for the ban. I just don't think they are all that influential and banning them is solving a problem that largely does not exist.

I agree with that, but at the same time I don't think the really fine detail really helps make a statistically significant different amount of putts. There are a ton of variables that go into making just about any putt outside of ~8ft or so that are much larger in magnitude than the resolution of the vectors in the books. They are more a sanity check/confidence booster than anything.

In which case they can buy a 3D scanning tool and get the information themselves.

Precisely my point. You don't think pundits and naysayers are constantly in their ears, filling their heads with notions of what is an unfair advantage and what is not? This is essentially the guys who don't use the books thinking they will get a leg up on the guys who don't

I was absolutely being snarky, because this notion you are surrounding your argument on has nothing to do with the rules. If a player asks another player what distance they have, they are absolutely allowed to share that information. The tour disallowing the use of the technology during tournament rounds is a farce if they allow the use of it to build yardage books. It's a dog and pony show to appease the "purists"

I don't think the tour gives a rats a** about a few thousand bucks per tournament, lol. I know/play with one of the big names that area, 100% a hobby.

I thought it was obvious, Zalatoris is clearly one of the future superstars of golf. It would make a ton of sense for his mum to curate his diet to mimic that body type. It's a recipe for success that will translate to the boardroom after golf, european tailored suits favor the slim.

So as long as they get the readily available information, only copy the contours into their own book on behalf of their own team, then we are all good. Got it.

Zalatoris and the OPs mum are both WF alum and had a great lunch together, it's obvious Zalatoris is going to help him get on the golf team and as such he now idolizes him. Get with the program!

I've been consuming all the free decade stuff for some time now, finally purchased the full version, I shall read up on this.

Not my words! I think the Zalatoris would be a great Gen Z Stiffler.

Is it any different than a player/caddie using GPS and laser range finders to build highly detailed yardage books (when casual golfers can use them on the fly). Why wouldn't they be able to do the same when constructing their own green book (ie use the commercial ones for reference).