Matthew Fitzpatrick whines about BDC...

[jdowning111]

How long can BAD last swinging this way without an injury?  One swing too many and he could trash a knee or his back......

[thezinfan]

13 minutes ago, jdowning111 said:

How long can BAD last swinging this way without an injury?  One swing too many and he could trash a knee or his back......

I've been wondering that. I think it's great that BAD is blazing a trail, but he could also go down the same injury path as Tiger.

[Stanks]

1 hour ago, mahonie said:

Takes a tool to know a tool...Cam Smith is an Aussie 🙄

I have been served. 

[mahonie]

27 minutes ago, Stanks said:

I have been served. 

Nicely played sir 👍

[llewol007]

6 hours ago, braincramp52 said:

 

 

Are you saying good college players don't get paid Bad?😏

Players in college don’t get paid, they just free stuff, like a car to drive around or a home that their family can stay in. You know little things that big college programs never want to talk about. What do you think the boosters are for. 

[Stanks]

28 minutes ago, mahonie said:

Nicely played sir 👍

Dude's still a tool, though. 

[miamistomp]

 Obviously not a power tool tho or he would be stronger

Edited October 11, 2020 by miamistomp

[rawdog]

20 hours ago, MtlJeff said:

He is full of crap.  Any pro athlete who says he "could" do things if he felt like it, that he admits lead to more success and fame...but chooses not to...

 

Yeah, umm ok

 

A lot of golfers just dont want to put in the work Bryson did.  At least when Tiger was crushing by him,  Phil hit the gym like a man instead of crying about it

 

That's my issue with the take.

 

So you could do it and are choosing not to? Interesting approach.

[mjtoal]

5 hours ago, bscinstnct said:

 

He should have emphasized layouts in his comments.

 

Then again, he points out that US Open was very tight...

 

“But in the U.S. Open at Winged Foot, fair play to Bryson, he won and shot six under. But the fairways were tight as hell. I drove it brilliantly and actually played pretty well [despite missing the cut by one stroke], but I was miles behind. He’s in the rough and miles up and he’s hitting wedges from everywhere. It just makes a bit of a mockery of the game”

 

So, I read it as a bit of frustration at his own lack of length. But there is a point of balance in rewarding length but not too much at the expense of accuracy.

 

Yesterday, BD went out in 38. He was wild off the tee and the high numbers piled up fast...

 

 

 

 

Sure, but if the rough is playable, then having a wedge is still an advantage compared to a 6 iron from the fairway. If the rough is knee deep barbed wire, he is a disadvantage, although he can still hit a 2 iron past Fitz's drive probably. 

 

Don't get me wrong,. BdC is perfectly right to make whatever changes he think will advantage his game, and he is fun to watch, aptly for some of the audacious drives and some of the car crashes. But the game is better when there is a balance between the power game and the precision game. It is also bad when it is a plodding game like the US Open used to be in the 80s, with boring fairways and greens, chip out sideways from the rough. There is a balance to be struck. 

[blueonblack]

I don't know a lot about Fitzpatrick so I looked to see what SIZE a player he is.

155 lbs and in the lead on the Euro Tour.

 

If you can't see the poor guy's point that linebacker size is needed moving forward, I'm not sure anyone is really paying attention to the state of the pro game? Do you FORCE him to become some physical behemoth he never wanted to be in order to continue to play the pro game? Or can we afford some people with God-given talent and a large amount of work already a place to play moving forward?

 

I don't see sour grapes at all. The Tour is making certain "conditions of employment" essentially a necessity. Large size and strength. Its testing employment law once again I almost have a feeling.

Pro sports are huge non-profit, tax-exempt legal case law testing grounds too.

This is getting interesting....

[bubbagump]

6 minutes ago, blueonblack said:

I don't know a lot about Fitzpatrick so I looked to see what SIZE a player he is.

155 lbs and in the lead on the Euro Tour.

 

If you can't see the poor guy's point that linebacker size is needed moving forward, I'm not sure anyone is really paying attention to the state of the pro game? Do you FORCE him to become some physical behemoth he never wanted to be in order to continue to play the pro game? Or can we afford some people with God-given talent and a large amount of work already a place to play moving forward?

 

I don't see sour grapes at all. The Tour is making certain "conditions of employment" essentially a necessity. Large size and strength. Its testing employment law once again I almost have a feeling.

Pro sports are huge non-profit, tax-exempt legal case law testing grounds too.

This is getting interesting....

 

I can not think of a couple, let alone 1 golfer that if I saw them on the street would really qualify as large and strong looking.  Not to mention, smaller/skinny/thin/fat dudes/dadbods are still doing quite well on tour. 

 

Fitzpatricks comments to me, are simply a result of over saturation and repetition of being asked about the same dude with a dbag personality.  

Edited October 11, 2020 by bubbagump

[miamistomp]

Hogan, Chi Chi and now Rory, Wolff-- You dont have to be big to hit a respectable distance

 

  He better get a trainer or get a new line of work 

[blueonblack]

1 minute ago, bubbagump said:

 

I can not think of a couple, let alone 1 golfer that if I saw them on the street would really qualify as large and strong looking.  Not to mention, smaller/skinny/thin/fat dudes/dadbods are still doing quite well on tour. 

Golf and distance don't have to mean "bulk" or massive workouts.

No one talked about Hank Kuehne's workout regimen that I can recall when he was within a couple yards of B.A.D.'s season shortened driving stats from last year, and that was about 2002 already?

Some people are freaky long naturally too like Bubba, or Daly, or Robert Garrigus, etc. and it doesn't take endless bulking up. B.A.D. is not really that far off at all from the former "freaks" of the tour that were a good 30 yards longers sometimes than the guy sitting at #10 for top driving distance.

That guy at #10 when Kuehne was a full 30 yards longer RICH BEEM. Remember him?

Same thing these days, a few guys are freaks and the rest fall in line somewhere thereafter.

 

You don't change the game because of a few distance "freaks" on tour, IMO.

How long is this even sustainable for B.A.D. A whole lotta "jets cooling" is needed, I feel.

[MtlJeff]

17 minutes ago, blueonblack said:

I don't know a lot about Fitzpatrick so I looked to see what SIZE a player he is.

155 lbs and in the lead on the Euro Tour.

 

If you can't see the poor guy's point that linebacker size is needed moving forward, I'm not sure anyone is really paying attention to the state of the pro game? Do you FORCE him to become some physical behemoth he never wanted to be in order to continue to play the pro game? Or can we afford some people with God-given talent and a large amount of work already a place to play moving forward?

 

I don't see sour grapes at all. The Tour is making certain "conditions of employment" essentially a necessity. Large size and strength. Its testing employment law once again I almost have a feeling.

Pro sports are huge non-profit, tax-exempt legal case law testing grounds too.

This is getting interesting....

 

Every sport has conditions , especially at the highest level.  

 

Could I have sued US colleges for discrimination because I wasn't fast enough to get a basketball scholarship , despite being a very skilled shooter and passer? Or challenged local employment laws after knocking down 20 threes is a row....Why is that all that different?

Edited October 11, 2020 by MtlJeff

[blueonblack]

5 minutes ago, MtlJeff said:

 

Every sport has conditions , especially at the highest level.  

 

Could I have sued US colleges for discrimination because I wasn't fast enough to get a basketball scholarship , despite being a very skilled shooter and passer? Why is that all that different?

Hmmm...let's see if I can navigate this correctly...

 

Not everyone can play guard on a basketball team. You often need a 7 ft center to win a champ.

What the tour is doing is asking everyone to be a 7 foot center. Obviously, not everyone has such god-given gifts. But golf was a venue where, at least formerly, people of various sizes and strengths could still rise to the occasion, like a Cory Pavin. And the little guy winning was lore from there on.

 

What will be golf "lore" with all linebackers all hitting it a mile? I totally see their point, and I hope others do too.

 

Your questions also become all the more interesting in the context of the NCAA and paying athletes for their participation.

Edited October 11, 2020 by blueonblack

[m d g]

2 hours ago, llewol007 said:

Players in college don’t get paid, they just free stuff, like a car to drive around or a home that their family can stay in.

Maybe that way now...

 

The old joke back in the day was that both OJ and Reggie Bush took pay cuts when they joined the NFL : )

[MtlJeff]

12 minutes ago, blueonblack said:

Hmmm...let's see if I can navigate this correctly...

 

Not everyone can play guard on a basketball team. You often need a 7 ft center to win a champ.

What the tour is doing is asking everyone to be a 7 foot center. Obviously, not everyone has such god-given gifts. But golf was a venue where, at least formerly, people of various sizes and strengths could still rise to the occasion, like a Cory Pavin. And the little guy winning was lore from there on.

 

What will be golf "lore" with all linebackers all hitting it a mile? I totally see their point, and I hope others do too.

 

Your questions also become all the more interesting in the context of the NCAA and paying athletes for their participation.

 

That kind of is happening now slowly.  Most point guards taken high in the draft are taller now, 6'5 ish , and its conceivable that the position could dissappear entirely as teams use 6'8-6'9 playmakers to run their offense through (Lebron,  ben Simmons , giannis etc). The game is slowly becoming 5 guys between 6'7 and 6'10.

 

I just mean its hard to start regulating this, when does it become impossible and you have to just start doing the dreaded participation medals. 

 

The nature of sport is just that some extreme levels of athleticism are usually required at the highest levels. Sometimes it seems even unfair (as mentioned i could spent all day practicing hoops and I never could've made the NBA)

[Superbrit]

So basically he's saying he could add length if he wanted to (knowing length is an advantage) but doesnt want to, so basically hes lazy with a defeatist attitude, im surprised hes won as much as he has tbh.

 

And what does he think should happen, everyone who hits it over 320 should get banned?

 

What an idiot

[blueonblack]

1 minute ago, MtlJeff said:

 

That kind of is happening now slowly.  Most point guards taken high in the draft are taller now, 6'5 ish , and its conceivable that the position could dissappear entirely as teams use 6'8-6'9 playmakers to run their offense through (Lebron,  ben Simmons , giannis etc). The game is slowly becoming 5 guys between 6'7 and 6'10.

 

I just mean its hard to start regulating this, when does it become impossible and you have to just start doing the dreaded participation medals. 

 

The nature of sport is just that some extreme levels of athleticism are usually required at the highest levels. Sometimes it seems even unfair (as mentioned i could spent all day practicing hoops and I never could've made the NBA)

Is this the part I admit in any way to have followed the Timberwoes over the years and their desperate need for a "true point" as they dabbled with that same 6'7" notion in vain for decades now? Oof. Salary cap and the owners willing to blast past it give you the LA Lakers.

 

I think the game of basketball is more exciting now than it was with all the guys in Chuck Taylors and endless passing, in some ways, but I didn't watch any of the Finals. Didn't hold my interest, and golf holds less of my interest too the more "homogenized" the game and society becomes.

When they all become the same size on the court too, it's less interesting.

 

Will Football become all 350 lb linemen? What will the game look like then?

Same with golf?

[blueonblack]

4 minutes ago, Superbrit said:

So basically he's saying he could add length if he wanted to (knowing length is an advantage) but doesnt want to, so basically hes lazy with a defeatist attitude, im surprised hes won as much as he has tbh.

 

And what does he think should happen, everyone who hits it over 320 should get banned?

 

What an idiot

Harsh? He's won a lot without having to do so. But should he have to?

Setting up courses, or even playing courses that don't fit one style of player, is a good start.

Bryson is the real deal, so its creating a conundrum right now. But all things have their time and pass, and its just a question of how reflexive everyone wants to get due to one player.

 

They kinda moved the goalposts with Tiger, and everyone caught up. Move the goalposts to totally a distance-driven game and narrative, and you lose that "David vs. Goliath" aspect like a Corey Pavin, that made for such excellent golf theatre. Or Jack winning the Masters at 45 yrs of age.

 

Where will those kinds of stories come from to make it all "interesting" moving forward?

I don't find golf all that interesting on the TV anymore, really. Not as many of those story lines.

Brooks, Bryson, Woodland. Are we seeing prototypical body pattern here? I think so.

 

Making someone do something that they never had to before is a very dangeorous situation as well as far as performance enhancing drugs too and the pressures to do things in the name of money.

[Sean2]

Like pretty much everything else in life, the game of golf is evolving. Some will be resistant to that evolution. 

[pinestreetgolf]

On 10/10/2020 at 10:24 AM, bladehunter said:

That’s his point though.  Is it “ the game passing by “?  Or is it “ the games “ last death squawk before it morphs into a new game ?      I’m not arguing it. I just think folks are reading it with blinders on.   At some point “ the game “ ceases to be if it continues towards a long drive affair.  Right ? 

It’s always been like this you just didn’t notice it because the longer drivers always dominate but they didn’t always do it while being really weird dudes. Jack and Tiger are the best ever because of the tee ball, no other reason.  Pound for pound the best iron player ever is Luke Donald and the best wedge player is Tom Kite. One major between them. It’s always been driver and it always will be. Romanticize all you’d like but there is no golden age of golf when tee distance wasn’t the most important thing. Just reality. It’s more in your face now but that doesn’t change the past.

[bladehunter]

Just now, pinestreetgolf said:

It’s always been like this you just didn’t notice it because the longer drivers always dominate but they didn’t always do it while being really weird dudes. Jack and Tiger are the best ever because of the tee ball, no other reason.  Pound for pound the best iron player ever is Luke Donald and the best wedge player is Tom Kite. One major between them. It’s always been driver and it always will be. Romanticize all you’d like but there is no golden age of golf when tee distance wasn’t the most important thing. Just reality. It’s more in your face now but that doesn’t change the past.

Never said there was.  In fact I said loudly that i wanted the long hitter to remain the king.  I’m concerned with scale.  378 yard drives don’t fit.  Period.  

[OrangeGravy]

9 hours ago, braincramp52 said:

 

 

Are you saying good college players don't get paid Bad?😏

Not "officially"
 

[Superbrit]

30 minutes ago, blueonblack said:

Harsh? He's won a lot without having to do so. But should he have to?

Setting up courses, or even playing courses that don't fit one style of player, is a good start.

Bryson is the real deal, so its creating a conundrum right now. But all things have their time and pass, and its just a question of how reflexive everyone wants to get due to one player.

 

They kinda moved the goalposts with Tiger, and everyone caught up. Move the goalposts to totally a distance-driven game and narrative, and you lose that "David vs. Goliath" aspect like a Corey Pavin, that made for such excellent golf theatre. Or Jack winning the Masters at 45 yrs of age.

 

Where will those kinds of stories come from to make it all "interesting" moving forward?

I don't find golf all that interesting on the TV anymore, really. Not as many of those story lines.

Brooks, Bryson, Woodland. Are we seeing prototypical body pattern here? I think so.

 

Making someone do something that they never had to before is a very dangeorous situation as well as far as performance enhancing drugs too and the pressures to do things in the name of money.

Players with distance always had an advantage, nothing has changed, but doesnt mean the average hitters can't win or compete, morrikawa has just won the PGA, he can't get no where near bryson length wise, Bryson has only won one major up to now

 

If fitz doesn't want to add length then thats his perogative but don't start moaning about someone who has, and who is pretty damn good at all the other aspects of the game as well.

 

 

[bscinstnct]

10 minutes ago, pinestreetgolf said:

It’s always been like this you just didn’t notice it because the longer drivers always dominate but they didn’t always do it while being really weird dudes. Jack and Tiger are the best ever because of the tee ball, no other reason.  Pound for pound the best iron player ever is Luke Donald and the best wedge player is Tom Kite. One major between them. It’s always been driver and it always will be. Romanticize all you’d like but there is no golden age of golf when tee distance wasn’t the most important thing. Just reality. It’s more in your face now but that doesn’t change the past.

 

Jack and TW were both as strong with the putter as their drivers. If the weren’t,

 

theyd be

 

 

Tony Finau ; ) 

 

 

Plus both were absolutely elite long/mid iron players. 
 

You can do a lot as a tour pro with just a tremendous driver, but guys like TW and Jack need their irons and putting to be top notch or neither would have been nearly as effective.

 

And Rory and DJ show us that there is a lot you need to do besides be a great driver in order to win a *lot of majors.

 

This is where we will see how it works out for BD. He won the US Open with driver but also he putted lights out and his wedge game was unusually good for him. He is a consistent putter and with driver and putter, he will win. But if his wedge game drops back to mediocre and he can’t keep swinging out of his shoes and keep it on the fairway, he will be highly competitive but not a dominant player.

 

 

 

 

[oikos1]

I don't recall ever hearing another competitor of relevance in any sport ever criticize the desire and will of another competitor for attempting to be the best they can be within the rules of that sport. 

 

Fitzpatrick isn't going to win very many majors with an attitude like that.

[bubbagump]

24 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

Never said there was.  In fact I said loudly that i wanted the long hitter to remain the king.  I’m concerned with scale.  378 yard drives don’t fit.  Period.  

 

Why not?  

 

Freakshows in every sport have always been mainly that, shouldn't be penalized for it especially when in reality they arent winning at some alarming rate, and the field isn't really experiencing the same performance.  

Edited October 11, 2020 by bubbagump

[OrangeGravy]

6 minutes ago, bubbagump said:

 

Why not?  

 

Freakshows in every sport have always been mainly that, shouldn't be penalized for it especially when in reality they arent winning at some alarming rate, and the field isn't really experiencing the same performance.  

Sure right NOW, the field isn't experiencing the same performance, but the greater point is that if he's successful enough (doesn't need to totally dominate for this to happen), at some point the field WILL be doing the same thing. He's showing that the field can get to 350+ by choice more so than natural ability. That is the main issue going forward. The differentiator is that. If it was strictly natural ability like TF or Champ, there's no real concern that the field will eventually look the same and if it did, it would take a long time to get there. 

[bladehunter]

5 minutes ago, bubbagump said:

 

Why not?  

 

Freakshows in every sport have always been mainly that, shouldn't be penalized for it especially when in reality they arent winning at some alarming rate, and the field isn't really experiencing the same performance.  

Lol. The same reason you want to see it is the same reason I don’t  want to see it.  I’ll see your why not and raise you a “ why so “?  
 

but seriously.  The reason why not is many. Pace of play , setup changes it will bring , and the general idea of the game  itself.  What will happen when all 420 yard par 4s have players waiting on the tee for the green to clear ?     What happens when a guy can fly it over every dogleg at Augusta ? Do we install spotters to  radio to the tee whne it’s clear ?     I’m simply saying scale.  340 carry is the limit of scale on moist courses on earth in my opinion as a rough guess.  
 

similar note. What if we saw pitchers throw 145 mph in the mlb ?  Wouldn’t we need to move the mound back and down to scale it to a workable game ?