MD/DC/VA Golfers - Twelve Monkeys Mental Divergence

[SullGolf]

It would have been better golf if they had played it in Scotland obviously. Otherwise it was definitely a good watch all around. Liked the format. Liked the game. Loved that I had zero idea what any of the point scoring was about. The pros they had were a good had a good mix of game and good humor.

 

After seeing Trust Fund Tron in person (/video), he's different than I expected from the pod. I pictured as a skinny blonde kid with frosted tips or a bad dye job. The closest thing that comes to mind is the kid that's the first caddie for Happy Gilmore.

[thechief16]

I will give TFT the benefit of the doubt and assume the aggravation at Randy was part of the act. But he needs to nut up and post his handicap for all to see, like Soly.

[gsrjc]

Anyone know a great lawyer in this area that deals with non compete agreements? I need someone to review it and maybe edit before I sign.

 

You bailing on your govt job? I just blindly signed my non compete like a maroon.

 

I’ve had something setup for a while now. Oh never a good thing to just sign that document without reviewing.

[TheCityGame]

Anyone know a great lawyer in this area that deals with non compete agreements? I need someone to review it and maybe edit before I sign.

 

You bailing on your govt job? I just blindly signed my non compete like a maroon.

 

I've had something setup for a while now. Oh never a good thing to just sign that document without reviewing.

Really, though?

 

I mean, that's the "smart advice", but isn't what always happens someone gets a lawyer to look at it and the lawyer goes, "seems fine. Boilerplate stuff." And then you sign it anyway, but you brought a lawyer into it.

 

And, then people just break them when they want anyway and unless you're the chief mixologist at Pepsi going to Coke, no one really cares post-job anyway.

[SullGolf]

I’m mostly with City on the non compete thing. For the most part they either aren’t enforced or are unenforceable. I work for a big company and signed one many years ago. The only time I’ve ever heard of it being enforced was for a big wig exec in an emerging business who then went to run the same business for a competitor. Thousands of people working for him, billions in potential revenue, and deep insight in to our multi year strategy.

 

The other one that could come up is if you are in sales. I’ve heard of issues with sales guys taking client lists with them and getting hammered. We have some actual sales guys with experience who could chime in on that.

 

When I bought my house I asked the realtor for a day to read the dozens of pages of paperwork. She looked at me like I had two heads and said that if I don’t sign the paperwork I don’t get the house. I didn’t just blindly sign anything, but she had a point. I suspect the job is probably like that with the paperwork you have.

[gsrjc]

Not in sales but in medical device strategy and regulatory so not many of us out there especially with FDA experience. This NCA says I can’t work for any competitor with similar technology until 1 year after termination of any cause. With my trade, that’s very restrictive.

[TheCityGame]

Not in sales but in medical device strategy and regulatory so not many of us out there especially with FDA experience. This NCA says I can't work for any competitor with similar technology until 1 year after termination of any cause. With my trade, that's very restrictive.

Yeah, but unless you're a muckety muck, your options are probably "sign it" or "don't take the job".

 

You're not going to negotiate them down to "6 months", right?

 

Or not, I've been at the same place for almost 20 years now so I'm not really sure about the state of affairs out there in the "real world".

[ceejay81]

I'm so clueless. Just realized Monday is a holiday for me.

 

Since I'm on my way out, I might as well take Tuesday off as well.

[gsrjc]

Not in sales but in medical device strategy and regulatory so not many of us out there especially with FDA experience. This NCA says I can't work for any competitor with similar technology until 1 year after termination of any cause. With my trade, that's very restrictive.

Yeah, but unless you're a muckety muck, your options are probably "sign it" or "don't take the job".

 

You're not going to negotiate them down to "6 months", right?

 

Or not, I've been at the same place for almost 20 years now so I'm not really sure about the state of affairs out there in the "real world".

 

I already accepted the position and signed my paperwork and this came after the fact. Just makes me uncomfortable that there’s a potential limitation for my career growth if things don’t go well at this company.

 

The NCA does have certain states listed where the NCA is not accepted. Not sure they would make an exception for me.

[baddomes]

What if you just don't sign a non-compete?

 

What will they withhold from you?

 

edit: Wait the non-compete is at the new job, I assume. Nevermind. I'm going to get coffee now.

[dcmidnight]

Not in sales but in medical device strategy and regulatory so not many of us out there especially with FDA experience. This NCA says I can't work for any competitor with similar technology until 1 year after termination of any cause. With my trade, that's very restrictive.

Yeah, but unless you're a muckety muck, your options are probably "sign it" or "don't take the job".

 

You're not going to negotiate them down to "6 months", right?

 

Or not, I've been at the same place for almost 20 years now so I'm not really sure about the state of affairs out there in the "real world".

 

I already accepted the position and signed my paperwork and this came after the fact. Just makes me uncomfortable that there's a potential limitation for my career growth if things don't go well at this company.

 

The NCA does have certain states listed where the NCA is not accepted. Not sure they would make an exception for me.

 

I know that labor law / advice will vary from state to state - and that NCAs can vary pretty widely too in terms of specificity - although my experience has been they are generally "considered" unenforceable. Whether or not that is how it plays out in real life - I dont know.

 

To me, its worth a call to a lawyer in your area. Hit up Google, find someone close that does labor law. Probably wont *need* to have done it. But if you find someone that has done this kind of work before, they could at least walk you through what the actual, real life consequences are of breaking it - if there are any.

 

I dont think in the future that "hey, but, a bunch of my internet superfriends who arent labor lawyers and dont know anything about anything - they told me it wasnt enforceable" - thats probably not a good legal defense to go forward with if you need one.

[2moreTerps]

Or. OR. You realize you can start putting those 5 footers with a little break more aggressively if you leave the pin in.

 

the drop off in % made from 2 feet to 5 feet cannot be overcome by holing a greater % of longer putts and holing more 5 footers by leaving the pin in and changing strategy.

[FAbb]

Or. OR. You realize you can start putting those 5 footers with a little break more aggressively if you leave the pin in.

 

the drop off in % made from 2 feet to 5 feet cannot be overcome by holing a greater % of longer putts and holing more 5 footers by leaving the pin in and changing strategy.

 

What?

[gsrjc]

Not in sales but in medical device strategy and regulatory so not many of us out there especially with FDA experience. This NCA says I can't work for any competitor with similar technology until 1 year after termination of any cause. With my trade, that's very restrictive.

Yeah, but unless you're a muckety muck, your options are probably "sign it" or "don't take the job".

 

You're not going to negotiate them down to "6 months", right?

 

Or not, I've been at the same place for almost 20 years now so I'm not really sure about the state of affairs out there in the "real world".

 

I already accepted the position and signed my paperwork and this came after the fact. Just makes me uncomfortable that there's a potential limitation for my career growth if things don't go well at this company.

 

The NCA does have certain states listed where the NCA is not accepted. Not sure they would make an exception for me.

 

I know that labor law / advice will vary from state to state - and that NCAs can vary pretty widely too in terms of specificity - although my experience has been they are generally "considered" unenforceable. Whether or not that is how it plays out in real life - I dont know.

 

To me, its worth a call to a lawyer in your area. Hit up Google, find someone close that does labor law. Probably wont *need* to have done it. But if you find someone that has done this kind of work before, they could at least walk you through what the actual, real life consequences are of breaking it - if there are any.

 

I dont think in the future that "hey, but, a bunch of my internet superfriends who arent labor lawyers and dont know anything about anything - they told me it wasnt enforceable" - thats probably not a good legal defense to go forward with if you need one.

 

I agree. Probably a good idea to have a lawyer take a look at it.

[TheCityGame]

So, I got an email from the Golfer's Journal yesterday. They're sending out an email in between issues just to keep up with stuff. Anyway, yesterday, they linked to an interesting article in Outside magazine.

 

Is Sunscreen the new Margarine?

 

These types of things are "red meat" in my office. I'll give a summary because I think this is of interest to golfers (which is why TGJ shared in the first place).

 

The "margarine" in the title refers to the idea that we started using margarine to avoid the fats in butter, and it turns out the trans-fats in margarine are way worse for you. The author's point was that we've been told for so long that sunscreen is good for us, when in fact it might be indirectly harming us. (not actually "harming" us, but preventing a "positive" from happening, which is the same thing)

 

One idea is that we use the sun to generate Vitamin D and nitric oxide. Both are protective against many kinds of disease (cardio vascular, diabetes, etc), but we're not generating enough of them because we're avoiding sunlight too much and we don't work outside any longer.

 

This physiological idea was tied together with the results from a long-term Swedish study that showed that people with "sun exposure habits" lived considerably longer than people who avoided the sun. As a matter of fact, non-smoking sun-avoiders lived about as long as people with high sun-exposure who smoked. It's not a small effect.

 

So, anyway, a takeaway from the article might be that we don't need to be treating the sun like it's the devil. That our "paling" and "tanning" are actually natural response to sun exposure and that our tanning is actually a protection against too much sun during the summer and we just handle

 

Nuanced things that the article skips and that I couldn't get from the technical papers :

 

Small effect : when the study was started in the early 90's, they identified people as "sun avoiders" and "sun exposers". There was no indication of whether the sun avoiders were that way because they might have had previous sun exposure problems. It's possible the study was designed to take care of this. I only could read the abstract.

 

The BIG THING : the technical paper refers to people with "sun exposure habits" having lower rates of cardio-vasc disease, and other things. It DOES NOT say that "getting more sun reduces these rates". It says that people with "sun exposure habits" have lower rates of these things. In other words, people who get outside, exercise, hike, golf, whatever have lower rates of CVD and it might not be the sun. IOW, "correlation is not causation".

 

Response to the BIG THING : but, there does seem to be a physiological reason to get sun. I refer back to the Vitamin D and nitric oxide findings from above. That guy says in the article that the level of these things goes up when you get more sun exposure and we actually observe lower blood pressure when exposed to more sunlight. So, there does actually seem to be something to this other than "more active lifestyle correlates with more sun exposure".

 

Couple of last points :

 

Vitamin D supplements have been shown NOT to have the same effects as natural generation of Vitamin D. This should be something we don't even question at this point in time, but people don't seem to ever get it. Like taking fish oil pills isn't the same as eating anchovies. Taking Vitamin C isn't the same as eating oranges.

 

Sun exposure DEFINITELY leads to more melanoma, both the "good kind" and the "bad kind". But, melanoma, not being very deadly, seems to be outweighed by the benefits of sun exposure (or sun exposure habits).

 

Lastly, the guy in the sun who says, "sure, sun exposure might lower hypertension, but we have pills for that." <--- I know almost everyone who reads this will go, "yup, that makes sense", but, in the parlance of our times, "I can't even". That type of thinking bothers me so bad. Oh, you're doing something that's probably not beneficial, but don't worry. . .have a pill for that.

 

The takeaway : I put sun screen on when it seems really bad out, or early in the year to avoid a burn, occasionally on my nose and cheeks, but not in a way that will really effect my sun light absorption (like legs or arms).

 

Still might make sense for Sully to use more sunscreen than the average joe, but the article also points out how the recommendations for C.Free and Eagle are probably much more detrimental because their risk of melanoma is very small, so sun exposure for them has a lot more upside.

[dcmidnight]

If that is the summary, how long is the article...

[dcmidnight]

I did get that email though. The last thing I really need - and I am a huge TGJ advocate - but the last thing I really want is more of these summary "journal" type emails. Daily, weekly, monthly, whatever it is.

[TheCityGame]

Or. OR. You realize you can start putting those 5 footers with a little break more aggressively if you leave the pin in.

 

the drop off in % made from 2 feet to 5 feet cannot be overcome by holing a greater % of longer putts and holing more 5 footers by leaving the pin in and changing strategy.

 

What?

I speak 2Morese.

 

He doesn't want to hit 10 footers 5 feet past.

 

He interpreted domes' as saying "it's OK to hit longer putts 5 feet past because 5 footers are easier because you can ram them."

 

The post you quoted is him saying "the increase in make percentage by leaving the flag in on 5 footers PLUS the increased make percentage in getting longer putts to the hole does not make up for the percentage difference between a 5 footer and a 2 footer, the proper pace for a putt."

[TheCityGame]

If that is the summary, how long is the article...

click on it. It's long. But, it's pretty well written and he goes into everything a little more deeply, but he leaves out the same things the "main stream media" always leaves out when they write articles that deal with survival analysis.

[SullGolf]

My dad regularly has carcinomas taken out now. So I try to be careful about it. But he also grew up in the 50s & 60s and they never wore sunscreen. Just got burned all the time.

 

I didn't read the TGJ article, but saw a news story on this earlier in the week. I just took it as "don't go crazy with the sunscreen." There are people out there who would suggest I wear sunscreen on a day like today, or when I venture out for 15 minutes on a sunny summer day. No thanks. My limit on a sunny afternoon is somewhere around an hour before I get burned, so that's about where I draw the line on putting on the sunscreen. If I'm playing at 7 or 8am, I'll throw on sunscreen when I hit the turn and the sun is getting higher in the sky. I try to avoid burns, not the sun.

[siegel159]

Everyone could just wear some sweet UV arm sleeves and bucket hats. Problem solved

[GooseHook]

Sun at Sweden's latitude vs. Maryland's. I think I'll still wear sunscreen.

 

Sunburn and sun poisoning are not fun, skin cancer less so.

[FAbb]

Or. OR. You realize you can start putting those 5 footers with a little break more aggressively if you leave the pin in.

 

the drop off in % made from 2 feet to 5 feet cannot be overcome by holing a greater % of longer putts and holing more 5 footers by leaving the pin in and changing strategy.

 

What?

I speak 2Morese.

 

He doesn't want to hit 10 footers 5 feet past.

 

He interpreted domes' as saying "it's OK to hit longer putts 5 feet past because 5 footers are easier because you can ram them."

 

The post you quoted is him saying "the increase in make percentage by leaving the flag in on 5 footers PLUS the increased make percentage in getting longer putts to the hole does not make up for the percentage difference between a 5 footer and a 2 footer, the proper pace for a putt."

 

I had to read this 3 times, but I get it now.

 

And I agree with my fellow neurotic can't putt shorties with the flag in comrade, 2MT.

[FAbb]

Based on no scientific research, I bet I've increased my risk of more, deadlier cancer from incidental inhalation of spray on sunscreen than my entire life of sun exposure has.

[TheCityGame]

Sun at Sweden's latitude vs. Maryland's. I think I'll still wear sunscreen.

 

Sunburn and sun poisoning are not fun, skin cancer less so.

One of the papers from the same authors, but not linked to in the Outside article says, "The results of this study provide observational evidence that avoiding sun exposure is a risk factor for all-cause mortality. Following sun exposure advice that is very restrictive in countries with low solar intensity might in fact be harmful to women's health."

 

My bolding.

 

EDIT: that doesn't mean it doesn't extrapolate to places with higher solar intensity. They just can't conclude that. Can't even conclude it for Swedish men. Even among the sun-screen wearers among us, I would assume we're getting plenty enough exposure if we play golf with any regularity, or do any of the other things we do. . .fish, boat, paddle, hike.

[Ocgolfrick]

Sun at Sweden's latitude vs. Maryland's. I think I'll still wear sunscreen.

 

Sunburn and sun poisoning are not fun, skin cancer less so.

EDIT: that doesn't mean it doesn't extrapolate to places with higher solar intensity. They just can't conclude that. Can't even conclude it for Swedish men.

 

 

 

[HighBoomingDraws]

1/3rd if the pool picked CHIII. Me included. Least efficient way to make up ground!

[TheCityGame]

1/3rd if the pool picked CHIII. Me included. Least efficient way to make up ground!

almost went with Cantplay.

 

I'm not worried about making up ground in week 3.

[2moreTerps]

we pursued a ex employee for the non-solicitation portion of his non compete and were successful. that means we sued him.

 

The inclusion of the NLU guys is critical. They make it more fun and in many ways what they re selling is themselves.

[therealsneek]

I went with Cantlay. I was surprised when I saw only one other person took him. There are a lot of lone wolves out there this week.