Jump to content

CT007

Members
  • Posts

    31
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

CT007's Achievements

12

Reputation

  1. This is really good cigar, you likely have seen Jim’s popular cigar - Leaf by Oscar, the cigar with removable cigar leaf outer wrapper. This cigar is the PBE. Story goes, when originally to be introduced it had a designed band, but got rejected by some board / IP standards. So they released it with this white band and P.B.E or Pre Band Edition. Medium + cigar, wonderful construction with tight leafs, yet still a great draw - if see it , be sure to try
  2. CT007

    U.S Amateur

    Re play from other fairways - I recently heard it was considered to add in course / internal out of bounds that is extreme solution , but it is a problem there or at least a less than desirable test of golf. Some of these holes it takes out all the bunkers, it creates a better angle into the green I’d suggest - maybe inland courses need trees as part of the routing. Or at least in regions where trees are natural W. Pa trees are here, maybe Neb it is different , but in Neb you can build course over 300-400 acres
  3. Iirc. The 6th hole was when BD got the drop and hit the tree. Harris played out of order, I’m pretty sure he hit his 2nd from fairway while BD got to his 3rd - in effort to speed up play how does PGA tell both are slow, when it is obv BD was slow and had rulings/drops/penalty’s I dont understand that
  4. Id list the benefits as 1. Pace of play 2. Pace of play 3. Pace of play 4. Playing 4 holes, any combo / and just walking on to play with son / wife (can’t do that anytime, but late in the day we can every time but events) as far as money goes, it why I buy good rum vs bad rum - something are worth it
  5. 2 things stand out to me. The 3rd , i assumed was obvious 1. Bifurcation - sure seems lot of bifir’ing going on. Wonder if USGA reads GolfWRX? 2. I dont see that he is that much longer than other players. It shows up often to me when he’s paired w Rory or DJ or JT. Its like if he was playing basketball and had great vertical and could dunk , so what. That is not the only part of the game. I’m sure there are 15 + players that could go for 6 at Bay Hill , but there is more to the game 3. He is an Word not allowed.
  6. I believe the course was outstanding. Quite a bit difference than typical PGA set up - the run offs, the minimal or non-rough rough, run off fairway into the native area’s. They talked on TV a good bit about slope of the greens, assume that kept scoring from going too low Also, I did not see any of the green book’s and TV said there was a lot of 3 putts this week 2x or 3x more than typical week Feel bad for CH, tough, but based on MC in past 9 of 11 , this will be really good in long run
  7. I played there in Feb. Dye tees. Its a typical Dye course, some shots require significant carry and some are deceptive, more room than appears My take away was the wind - its not normal wind we all play that often. We were convinced it was blowing 20 mph +/- Our caddy , who was very good, laughed at us. Said it was 8-10. Some gusts but not that much. We said no way. We pulled up a weather app on phone - 8 mph +/- He said anyone tells you they play in 25 mph winds is lying, its way too tough. Happens , but not that often As it is right along ocean, with no breaks, trees, you are feeling that wind on every shot. Its tough. Very tough. The difficulty is off the tee, there is room to hit the fairways , but nearly all misses are a reload, chop it out - they are full 1 to 2 shot penalties. The greens are not that fast, 8 I’d guess. ( I regularly play on 12+/- stimp greens) They are manageable, but the slopes and humps, place a premium on getting to correct section of the green. Our caddy, said they just cant get the greens too fast there due to slope and wind. I know some buddy’s that played few years back from tips. All but 1 broke 80, and their caps were 1-6 range I’d say single digit caps can - but not those over 10
  8. Lot o bitterness on this thread - hate the player - and now hate the asst pro’s I’ll stir the pot This is the rules of PGA of America. Omar just followed the rules, nothing more , nothing less Anyone ask how the PGA of America comes up with these rules ? How in touch are they with their members ? Supposedly, 29,000 members - ratio of Head Pro to Assistant Pro is like 1 :4. Some +/-. These asst pro kids make next to nothing , minimum wage I’m sure though Yet the CEO is an investment banker , with 15+/- memberships I’m sure he represents the best interests of his constitutes.
  9. The metrics is what gets me - I’m fine with players making money for performance, and on PGA tour, they don't get paid a 10 year guaranteed contract no matter if they play/play bad/etc - so good on players, to get their league to pay them $ But - How would MVP / Melt-waste-water score the recent LBJ tweet / delete tweet? If that is the plan, to try and get PGA players to be SJW , and make political statements - or if it’s not the official plan, but the consequence of the metrics - then count me out There is some good in tech social media world - but it is overwhelmed by the nonsense / falsehoods on there (not everyone’s opinion is worth hearing, IMO)
  10. I’m not going to try and compare team sport v individual sport wins, its fun - but need more beer for that this in modern era Tiger - 82 Phil - 44 VJ - 34 DJ - 24 Phil is really really good - maddening at times (like Merion on the 114 par 3 - you can’t freakin just hit the green and 2 putt - nooooo you gotta try some knock down, cutting, 3/4 swing 9 iron bs....), but really good
  11. Anyone else see PR bag on 18, and think he picked up a tractor sponsorship ?
  12. bsc my bad. Rookie error. Next round on me
  13. This needs to be viewed in 2 directions, and this is now difficult in todays era of social media. Yes it can be done, and I think Golf Today did a good job Sunday 10 am broadcast. Viewing some matter through the lens of looking back in time, with new knowledge or with presumptions, or with incorrect knowledge - all distort what you are seeing. We are human, we have bias and stereotypes and these will distort what we see when we look back Rather, try as best as you can, to look at it in real time. Possibly add facts that are known truths that maybe you didn’t know before - in this case the allowance for PGA Tour players to identify or inspect their ball for condition of embedded ball. This is acceptable to the PGA Tour and according to a PGA Tour rule official , its common practice. Real time : 2nd shoot goes left, towards rough. Its known that this course conditions are soft. No bounce of the call would be visible, we can reasonably assume it was not. PR asks if ball bounced, its reasonable that all said it did not/ or not known if did PR then announces to playing partners his intention PR notices embedded condition - but asks for rule official (remember new fact, that PGA Tour allows this by the players) Rule official called over Yadda, yaddaa, yaddaa, he gets relief and then.... To me, in real time this all seems routine. NOW - add in it what you know afterwards The ball clearly did bounce , the player in question has some past that leads to your assumptions or stereotype, and the act of checking the embedded ball looks awkward. My conclusion: Real time - this is routine, and happens more than we know on PGA Tour Looking back it looks bad, but hard to tell, but also hard for me to recommend this as standard operating procedure. Knowing that the ball bounces is a huge fact. The rules of golf assume the basic integrity and honesty of the player. That is why we do not have a referee with each player. This assumption, can be put to the test at time, and sometimes more often based on the player. Not a fan of PR, but this is borderline and when in my professional work I come across a situation that actions can lead to my character ca be called into question or not “above reproach” I call in a rules official.
  14. Strength of field is hard to determine The adage - correlation without causation is meaningless. That is little harsh, may be better to say , correlation does not imply causation Bottom line is correlation is hard to determine. Just adding population or adding players from differing country’s does not improve strength of field I’d say, go back and read some on Chad Campbell His playing performance on the Web.com , Hooters Tour , etc. Some thought he was a top 50 player in the world but could not get out of his backer agreement There is evidence of better players today, but it is skewed based on more data, more visibility And sometimes it is just unknown, as said earlier it was hard to get on the professional tour - both then and now. But I would say that there is equal evidence of players today being able to sustain playing tour golf and major’s golf, when they are beyond their best years - I’d say more so than in past. See 1953 and Hogan missing the PGA It’s still hard to determine. But fun discussion
  15. WRT to strength of field and competition , I think they both played who they played. Tiger’s 18 WGC wins “could” be discounted due to limited field, made for TV like events. Just as could be said of Jack’s Sahara Invitational, or the 4 Ball, etc. I just don’t buy the agreement one played better fields than the other. TW’s 10 year run was like nothing else. Jack’s career was like nothing else.
×
×
  • Create New...