calodo2003
Flaming Full Member
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Nah, he's a cnut.Hatton to LIV confirmed. Sad.
Modern day Tommy Bolt. Now that motherfecker was entertaining.Still sad. It was entertaining watching him chuck his clubs in the water and cursing everything and everyone at times.
This. Won’t be missedNah, he's a cnut.
Impressive.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
The coverage is garbage too, all they show is that 16th hole pretty much, barely know what any of the other holes on the course look like.This competition's gimmick was always going to wear thin and burn out. I wouldn't mind but it's a good course, would ve a good competition without it.
17 is a far more compelling hole.The coverage is garbage too, all they show is that 16th hole pretty much, barely know what any of the other holes on the course look like.
16 is feckin boring too
The scorecards are switched before the round, you give your card to your opponent & receive theirs. It's an extra degree of corroboration & getting the score correct before turning them in.Newish to golf but what's with the darks ages shit were speith I'd DQ for an incident scorecard at a live event tracked but computers etc.
Whats even the point of the scorecard at this level?
But it's archaic for pro golf when everything is tracked by computers.The scorecards are switched before the round, you give your card to your opponent & receive theirs. It's an extra degree of corroboration & getting the score correct before turning them in.
It might be, but it will never not be a part of professional golf at any level.But it's archaic for pro golf when everything is tracked by computers.
Why though is my question? What's the point or benefit of it at the pro level?It might be, but it will never not be a part of professional golf at any level.
It just creates a double check of the competitor's card & their personal card (this is the part that is the detachable).Why though is my question? What's the point or benefit of it at the pro level?
It's obviously required below that
I'm just trying to imagine the chaos when the computers get hacked and no one has a scorecardIt just creates a double check of the competitor's card & their personal card (this is the part that is the detachable).
I would be shocked if there was a proposed movement to computer scoring. No professional golfer would give up their scoring autonomy.
Because it's an integral part of the game. It really isn't hard to get right Spieth just made a mistake signing and leaving because he needed to shit his pants basically.Why though is my question? What's the point or benefit of it at the pro level?
It's obviously required below that
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
LIV probably paid for him to be in the headlines.Can someone remind me of why I should care about Anthony Kim? What's the aura around him?
No reason. Just 'tradition'. Like Caddies have to carry and can't use push carts etc.Why though is my question? What's the point or benefit of it at the pro level?
It’s not just tradition. It’s pretty integral to the game that a player and their playing partners monitor their own/each others score.No reason. Just 'tradition'. Like Caddies have to carry and can't use push carts etc.
They should do away with such meaningless traditions.
The walking scorers are good enough for TV, no reason why they should not be good enough for a golfer. Also most online websites including PGA website keeps online scores of every playing golfer through the round, TV coverage or not.It’s not just tradition. It’s pretty integral to the game that a player and their playing partners monitor their own/each others score.
It’s partly because there are 145 guys out there in groups of 3 with a volunteer scorer walking with them. They don’t include this volunteer in chats about drops or in rulings. The volunteer is tracking to keep the media/fans updated. Not to officially track the score.
Past the top 25/30 guys in the field every week, where they are getting no TV coverage it’s extremely common to see mistakes on the app, e.g. a player down for a par on one hole where they actually had a bogey. This may be rectified mid round when the scorer double checks with the player or it may not be updated until later. But it goes to show these volunteers make mistakes.
There are also shotlink spotters with each group but again, once the ball is off the tee, the rest of the data is collected by a person walking to each ball with a tablet. Their distance data is accurate. But they’re not involved in those chats about taking relief/unplayable etc.
The onus on tracking scoring will always be on the player and his playing partners and the majority of players would want it this way.
This is a funny argument - you're effectively saying that if Spieth had someone to track his score for him then he wouldn't have been disqualified. That's a non sequitur - the point really is that if Spieth himself can get it wrong, then why would the third party be any more accurate? The post you've responded to points out that the app gets scores wrong all the time (and it really does - there are corrections all the time). What would be achieved by giving to that?The walking scorers are good enough for TV, no reason why they should not be good enough for a golfer. Also most online websites including PGA website keeps online scores of every playing golfer through the round, TV coverage or not.
A majority are unintentional mistake and take a good golfer away from the game and fans (see recent Spieth DQ).
I doubt if PGA adopts an alternate method without the sword of DQ hanging over, there would be opposition from the players. There are ample workarounds and better ways to do this. It is archaic and should be done away with.
The walking scorers are good enough for TV, you're right. Because if they make a mistake, particularly down the field, it'll be rectified before it's noticed. But what if the mistake is late on in the round for a golfer on the cut line? And the PGA Tour website does keep score of every playing golfer. Often with mistakes that have to be rectified because they are being input by humans, often volunteers.The walking scorers are good enough for TV, no reason why they should not be good enough for a golfer. Also most online websites including PGA website keeps online scores of every playing golfer through the round, TV coverage or not.
A majority are unintentional mistake and take a good golfer away from the game and fans (see recent Spieth DQ).
I doubt if PGA adopts an alternate method without the sword of DQ hanging over, there would be opposition from the players. There are ample workarounds and better ways to do this. It is archaic and should be done away with.
Saw final round today and had similar thoughts. I think they are still struggling to get rid of the gimmicky feel to the event. I agree that the team aspect actually has value to it. Biggest issue unfortunately will forever be the struggle to match the intensity of a proper event. Like today Nieman was 2 shots ahead for most of the back 9 but it all felt so dead like it was a practice session.Been watching a bit of LIV golf recently incl. the event in Las Vegas, as a golf fan I would think it’s ignorant to ignore it particularly with all the big names playing in it nowadays.
The things I like was a lot of interesting innovations in terms of the TV coverage, it should certainly appeal to a younger audience. Having Ferity unleashed, edgy & uncensored as the main pundit adds to the youthfulness of the broadcast (even though he’s well in his 60’s).
I think there’s a lot of merit in the team concept. It brings an extra dimension. There’s some things that could be tweaked and the names of the teams are dreadful, but I think it’s generally a great innovation.
The most important advantage of LIV golf is that you’re guaranteed a star studded lineup at each event. Rahm, Dechamb, Johnson, Koepka, Smith, etc etc. The leaderboard is full of names you’d expect to see up there at each major.
However, I’m not a fan of the shotgun starts and the level of golf seems disappointing considering all the big names. I can’t quite put my finger on why that seems. Maybe it’s because of the limited pool of players in LIV and why form is such an important factor in golf (who ever thought Pavon would dominate the West coast swing in the PGA Tour?). Finally, some things are a bit gimmicky.
I think you can compare LIV golf to 20/20 cricket. If the PGA & Saudi’s can come to some agreement and have, for example, have two 6 week windows where LIV golf is played. Something needs to be done because the current situation is dreadful having two competing tours in professional golf.
They’ve really helped that by adding Anthony Kim to the field.I think they are still struggling to get rid of the gimmicky feel to the event.