Why Golf Sucks, rambling, inspired by other thread

[HDPM]

[ QUOTE ]
A lot of the issues with slow play come from an unintended John Daly effect. John hit it big (no pun intended) and suddenly, fat slobs everywhere figured they can play golf too as long as they can hit it a mile.

Here's the fallacy, though: John is long, but at least he's accurate. AND he can walk 18 holes. Ask all these other butterbeans to walk 18 holes and they'll say, "Huh?" Even if you give them a caddy.

Trend toward longer clubs and longer balls is killing the game. But it's making the club/ball makers a ton of money. I'm 5'4", and with todays technology I can hit it 290. That's BS.

[/ QUOTE ]


I wouldn't knock John because he plays at the pace golf should be played at. He pulls a club and hits. The slow play trickle down effect is from the pros who have a committee meeting with their caddy every shot. Nicklaus was a somewhat slow player and people began slowing down then. IBut yes, I wish more people copied the fast play aspect.

[aheravi]

Actually, I should've worded this better. I wasn't bashing Daly (or any pro) for that matter. Although amateurs will emulate the pros and take 5 minutes to look over an 8-foot putt.

What I was saying was:
1. Fat slobs think they can play golf.
2. Fat slobs suck, therefore spend more time looking for lost balls.
3. Fat slobs won't get out of the cart to look for ball, or won't walk ahead to their shot while their fat-slob friend is looking for his ball.


Really, I just hate fat slobs. Even though he's a big guy, I wouldn't call Daly a fat slob. He at least walks 5 miles twice a week (4 times if he makes the cut).

[JTrout]

90% of all the courses in N.E. Mississippi would qualify for the Retro G.A.!!
under 6600. slow greens. wide open. No big maintenence budget.
But <5% of the golfers walk. Shameful.

I was in the first group off (twosome) in a tournament several years ago.
We played in 1 hour 45 min.
Would have been quicker, but we caught the hole-cutter on the last 3 holes and had to wait on him.
When we finished, the 2nd group off (threesome) had yet to make the turn. Ouch.

I really like the idea of the RGA, especially the walking with <10 clubs (although there used to be No limit on the # of clubs one could carry).

There would be hardly any members around these parts, unfortunately.

[tuq]

[ QUOTE ]
In college, I asked to be moved out of pairings with certain players (low 70s shooters), simply because their pace of play was disgusting. I play for fun, not to watch some douche line up his putt from 4 sides.

[/ QUOTE ]
Rory, is that you?

I don't mind so much how thorough someone is being so long as they are prepared when it's their turn. That to me is the big issue, players just standing there doing nothing while others hit. Only once it's their turn do they start the process, like they're milking the spotlight or something.

And agreed about preferring to play with a fast 20 HDCP than a slow 5 HDCP. There are some passably decent golfers who feel they have to put on some Ben Crane act to make them look like even more skilled.

Anyone ever notice how fast old players are? Lots of retirees out here and those guys play FAST. It's particularly remarkable considering they don't have anywhere to be.

[JTrout]

It's like the Seinfeld skit about old people and the speed limit.
Drive your age.
If you haven't got as long, you hurry up.

I've definately speeded up as I've aged.

[Tom Bayes]

[ QUOTE ]
90% of all the courses in N.E. Mississippi would qualify for the Retro G.A.!!
under 6600. slow greens. wide open. No big maintenence budget.
But <5% of the golfers walk. Shameful.


[/ QUOTE ]

Same in Kentucky. We have a par-THREE course that most of the fat slobs use carts on. What a joke. My dad has two artificial hips so he can't walk 18, but we'll get a cart and he'll walk some of the holes.

The regular course I used to play on made you use a cart on weekends so walkers like me wouldn't hold up play. Funny, whenever I walked on weekdays I was always being held up by rude lazy blankers in carts.

[Sexual Chocolate]

If they changed the conventions of the game so that once you started putting, you continue to putt until you sink it, I think that would knock off 30-45 minutes a round. The rest of the problems we could live with.

[Weatherhead03]

[ QUOTE ]
Hitting a fairway at 310 is more damned luck than anything. See the pros stats, 50% is good accuracy for that distance.

[/ QUOTE ]

The reason why you believe that it is luck to hit the fairway while hitting it that far is because you are not good enough to actually hit it that far. Think about it. These guys on the PGA are the best in the world. In 2005 only 3 players averaged over 310 yards. If you slow you swing down and actually swing in control then you will hit a lot more fairways and not lose all that much distance.

[ QUOTE ]
6500 yards is a more pleasant walk than 7500.

[/ QUOTE ]
I dont know if you are playing on the PGA or not but nobody is forcing you to play an course that is 7500 yards, especially considering there are only a handful in the entire United States.

[ QUOTE ]
Don't have 6 inch rough and bushes and tumbleweeds and impassable thorn gardens off the fairway.

[/ QUOTE ]

Again...why are you playing these courses if you dont like them?? Find a select few courses that you like and play them.

Golf is actually a very fun game if you can learn to enjoy it. Maybe you aren't fit for playing the toughest courses in the world as you make it sound. Why not buy a 12 pack and just have fun and not worry about your score for a couple of rounds, im sure it will make you enjoy the game a lot more.

[slickpoppa]

[ QUOTE ]
I play for fun, not to watch some douche line up his putt from 4 sides.


[/ QUOTE ]

That is what I meant by people who take themselves too seriously.

Anyway, I'm sorry if I made things personal. I am probably just jaded from having caddied for 5 summers. I've seen so many golfers who look for anything to complain about in order to justify their bad play.

[diddle]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hitting a fairway at 310 is more damned luck than anything. See the pros stats, 50% is good accuracy for that distance.

[/ QUOTE ]

The reason why you believe that it is luck to hit the fairway while hitting it that far is because you are not good enough to actually hit it that far. Think about it. These guys on the PGA are the best in the world. In 2005 only 3 players averaged over 310 yards. If you slow you swing down and actually swing in control then you will hit a lot more fairways and not lose all that much distance.

[ QUOTE ]
6500 yards is a more pleasant walk than 7500.

[/ QUOTE ]
I dont know if you are playing on the PGA or not but nobody is forcing you to play an course that is 7500 yards, especially considering there are only a handful in the entire United States.

[ QUOTE ]
Don't have 6 inch rough and bushes and tumbleweeds and impassable thorn gardens off the fairway.

[/ QUOTE ]

Again...why are you playing these courses if you dont like them?? Find a select few courses that you like and play them.

Golf is actually a very fun game if you can learn to enjoy it. Maybe you aren't fit for playing the toughest courses in the world as you make it sound. Why not buy a 12 pack and just have fun and not worry about your score for a couple of rounds, im sure it will make you enjoy the game a lot more.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you misunderstand me completely. I am 6'5" 235 so I hit the ball as far as I please-- yes, over 310 most of the time. Distance and accuracy with the driver are not a problem. If you don't believe me, what can I say. I am going to compete in some long drive events this year.

What if there were a ball that went 50% farther than the current ones? Then courses would have to be even longer. I think the ball as it is today is already out of control, distance-wise.

I think 6500 yds creates a good balance. 7000+ is just too long for most people to play and walk and move quickly.

I dream of being able to walk out to a public course, pay <$50, and play in < 3:30 hours.