Bogey Golfers Got No Reason To Think . . .

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

I think the biggest move from a 90's golfer to a mid 80's golfer is learning what they can and cannot do. Therefore playing within their own game. The is applied as learning to be strategic on the course. I teach that real soon after the basics are learned by a young golfer and the move down is almost automatic if they apply it.

[George Pazin]

Shivas -

As I read your many posts, I am reminding of a running joke I have with a friend of mine from college - and it's definitely one of those, you had to be there kind of things:

I would always reference something from my childhood and say that someone say I could be "one of the best". Then I'd say "ONE of the best? ONE OF? Screw it." So I quit.

Like I said, it's definitely one of those, had to be there kind of things.

[Lou_Duran]

Ok, Schmidt, saying that I am a myopic projectionist is a call to arms!  I never said that most golfers are willing to pay the price to get better.  If, as you stated, there exists a bunch of folks who don't give a flip (about shooting lower scores, improving, getting better, whatever you want to call it), then why have the costs of equipment gone so high that you can now lease rather than buy?  The guy trying to buy the newest $500 driver is doing so he can get worse?  I thought that the objective of the game was to shoot a lower score or at least one better than your opponent depending on the competition.  Perhaps next time I look for weekend results in the Chicago paper, I'll find the caption "he drank 10 beers, belched twice that, and had great fun" behind your name.  I guess that that is better than posting a couple 89s.  Were you not using game improving equipment last time we played?  Maybe an ugly long putter and an exotic metal, extra long driver?  Nah, you don't want to get better.  It is all a figment of my very narrow imagination.  Maybe I should start sitting on the SATs.

[DMoriarty]

Lou, even with your addendum, I still dont get it.   Whether stroke play, match play, or relative to the competition, choosing the optimal strategy will not always result in the lowest score.   For two reasons:  less than perfect execution,  chance.   Plus even if you shoot a career score, you can never be sure whether you might have gone lower if you'd tried something else.  . .

As for CPC 16, I think you did make the correct decision.  It just didnt work out.   Had you chosen the other route, it might not have worked out either.  That is the way it goes with golf.  That is my point.  

[Lou_Duran]

DavidM,

I chose the right shot for me at CPC #16 because I was capable of executing it with a high enough probability, and, contrary to how shivas has painted me, my total score is not always paramount.  Making a 4 there via the lay-up approach even though it would have allowed me to break par would not have given me greater satisfaction.  Only hitting that green, even if I three-putted it, or getting it up and down for par after trying to reach it would have been a nice kick.

When we approach a certain complicated hole, I think that most of us go through some quick mental gymanstics and decide on a higher probability, risk adjusted solution.  Being that we are human, we make judgement errors as well as physical mistakes (poor execution).  The optimal strategy for me is not that which allows me to make birdie on every hole, but playing the course in a way that enables me to shoot the lowest score that I am capable of given the conditions.

Using optimal in this context is merely as an objective knowing that we will seldom even approach it.  Strategy is also a difficult term.  Perhaps course management or playing the course to one's strengths is more of what I am talking about.  The bottom line to me is that thinking is only useful within the context on one's abilities.  If I can't hit it over 200 yards in the air with a high probability, going for the green on CPC #16 is not a strategic option.  Ceteris paribus, the higher the handicap, the lesser ability to control the flight of the ball (?), the fewer the options, the less thinking required.  What do you think?      

[Lou_Duran]

shivas,

Much of what I stated on this thread was a bit exagerated.  
The bit about pronating was farcical.  I am happy that you have your priorities in good form.  Are you quoting Ed Getka at the end of your post?  Was he running in high altitude or playing a strange oriental instrument when he came up with it?  Alternatively, was it Mike Cirba, or maybe Max Behr?

As to the SATs, never took them, never will.  I get feedback as to my mental acuity often enough on this site that I don't need further confirmation.  I don't need a kid with a 1500 to remind me of my weaknesses.  And nowdays, everybody is whooping my ass!

[DMoriarty]

The bottom line to me is that thinking is only useful within the context on one's abilities.  If I can't hit it over 200 yards in the air with a high probability, going for the green on CPC #16 is not a strategic option.  Ceteris paribus, the higher the handicap, the lesser ability to control the flight of the ball (?), the fewer the options, the less thinking required.  What do you think?      

Sometimes it takes willpower (not sure if that is thinking or not) to avoid trying unrealistic options.  

I think we overestimate the lesser golfer's wildness.   Generally, higher handicappers mistakes are distance related more than direction related.  In fact here is one to chew on . . .

The average bogey golfer hits his/her drive straighter [less yards off line] than the average scratch golfer, by a substantial margin.

So, while options requiring forced carries make things very difficult, unpredictable, and/or impossible for them, bogey golfers are generally as capable (more capable?) of following alternate horizontal routes to the hole.  

Therefore they still have plenty to think about provided that the course provides for it.  

[Joe Hancock]

The bottom line to me is that thinking is only useful within the context on one's abilities.  If I can't hit it over 200 yards in the air with a high probability, going for the green on CPC #16 is not a strategic option.  Ceteris paribus, the higher the handicap, the lesser ability to control the flight of the ball (?), the fewer the options, the less thinking required.  What do you think?      

Sometimes it takes willpower (not sure if that is thinking or not) to avoid trying unrealistic options.  

I think we overestimate the lesser golfer's wildness.   Generally, higher handicappers mistakes are distance related more than direction related.  In fact here is one to chew on . . .

The average bogey golfer hits his/her drive straighter [less yards off line] than the average scratch golfer, by a substantial margin.

So, while options requiring forced carries make things very difficult, unpredictable, and/or impossible for them, bogey golfers are generally as capable (more capable?) of following alternate horizontal routes to the hole.  

Therefore they still have plenty to think about provided that the course provides for it.  

DaveM,

How much of the above stated is factual vs. opinion?

Joe

[DMoriarty]

DaveM,

How much of the above stated is factual vs. opinion?

Joe

Since when does that matter with this group?  

Which part do you doubt?  The part about it taking willpower to refrain from trying to play beyone one's abilities?  

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

I have just spent the past 20 minutes reading all the threads, with some great opinions, from some very knowledgeable people.

At the very begining the question was  asked regarding the ability of the bogey golfer to make opinions on golf course strategy...I certainly hope so as they make up the majority of those playing the game, they are just as capable of passing judgement as the scratch player..if not more so, as they have to think their way around a golf course even more so than the guy who thinks he knows where the ball is going.

Course management is vital to reach the best score any golfer can attain.
It may be ignored as a learning experience by many club golfers, but it requires practice just as the swing requires practice to reach it's optimum level.
Course strategy is synonomous with course management there is no way you can seperate the two...a good player blends the two to produce the best score he can that day.
When I say good player, to me that means he who is able to get the most out of his game..whether that be a 66 or a 106..both can be good players by managing their respective games.
So what is strategy/course mangement?
For me that starts with managing myself and attempting to manage my mind.
The number one thing is acceptance...acceptance of your bad shots, enjoying the prospect of recovering from those less than desirable shots..and trusting that the next swing/chip or putt will not be anything but optimal.
If you cannot accept or enjoy the prospect of recovering from your bad shots, then you are not a golfer..as the nature of the game is to make mistakes, it is a game that cannot be perfected ans as such is laden with mistakes.

As simple as it sounds, the next important thing is to enjoy the game.....realise how good it is to be out on the golf course surrounded by green grass and friends.

Swing trust is an obvious key in course mangement, having the abiltiy to play with trust, is the single biggest source of on course confidence.
Trust enables you to play your best rather than playing play poorly .It is this trust that enables you to play with a feeling that outcome does not matter.....when you can get to this stage .....you can really start to play!!!!

Now you can look at the golf course and start to plan your way around with a game plan.

This game plan is where I think the better players distances himself from thr club golfer.
Probably through practice, or just because he has any plan at all..but whatever the reason, better players stick to their plan.
This does not mean that the plan is inflexible, quite the opposite, the better prepared the good player is, the more ellaborate his pre game plan will be..with options available to him to cover as many differentials as possible, such as weather conditions or the daily limitations of his own game any given day can provide.

I know that my own pre game preperation has improved drastically since I started to appreciate architecture more fully.
I think if you can think like the architect you can plan accordingly, that is not to say that I consider my knowledge of architecure to be at an architects level,but I have learned to appreciate some of the things the throw at golfers to make the course was it is.
Well now you all know how I think my way around agolf course.
Sorry if it bored the pants off you all.

[Lou_Duran]

Michael,

I was under the impression that the issue was the ability of the bogey golfer to take full advantage of the strategic options offered by the course.  Making opinions about strategy I don't think was central to the discussion, though I've argued before that the ability to play golf relatively well is a prerequisite or at least an important attribute of a great designer (those who disagree with me typically cite Raynor, who was really a great engineer with limited repertoire, but a fantastic eye for detail).

I've opined on this thread that the bogey golfer can't execute many of the shots that the architect allows for, so doing a great deal of strategizing does not lead to positive results for this guy.  I do believe that preparation, better understanding of the architecture, and playing within one's self are good ways to achieve success on the course.

BTW, Robert Jones, Jr. (RTJ's son) wrote a pretty good book on playing better golf by understanding the architect's intenet and techniques.  You can often find it on half.com at a reduced price.

Golf by Design: How to Lower Your Score by Reading the Features of a Course  Robert Trent Jones
» Hardcover, 1994  - Buy it for $11.00 (Save 72%)  

 
   

[ForkaB]

Since this thread seems to be refining itself into a metaphorical discussion of Lou's tee shot to 16 CPC on THAT day, with a very tacit subtext of Dave M's pusillanimous tee shot then too, all commented on by Dave S, who was there but hardly compos mentis by that time (and whose tee shot probably killed several endangered marine species...), as the 4th of that 4-ball (and only one to hit the green and make par--pardon whilst I pat myself on the back..... ), let me say that all of this is a bunch of CRAP, and furthermore, the title of this thread, echoing Randy Newman's infamous dity of the 70's is VERY offensive to short people, of which I was one until I moved to Scotland, where everybody is subaveragely sized.......

[TEPaul]

"....of which I was one until I moved to Scotland, where everybody is subaveragely sized....... "

So now the truth of why you moved to Scotland finally comes out! I think I know of a tribe in south-west Africa that will make you feel like a really big man. Would you like me to look into that for you?

[ForkaB]

Tommy

We all came out of Africa.  I have known for many years of my descendence from the Fugawee tribe (my ancestors used to wander through that high grass singing "We're the Fugawee!").  Where did the Pauls come from, the Wannabees or the Couddabeens or the Ustabees?

[A_Clay_Man]

Order the bucket!

[TEPaul]

Rich:

Maybe your family came from Africa but mine came from England!  

I just found out about two years ago that the Pauls were orginal Quakers who basically came over here with William Penn and picked up a Penn land grant in and around the area that is now the Philadelphia International Airport! (a pretty poor plot if you ask me!).

In any case, I've checked the land transfers and there are some serious deficiencies. I will shortly be in touch with Philadelphia to inform them that I have a clear right to just take the airport back as my own but since I wouldn't want to be that kind of bother to my fellow Philadelphia brethern all I'll ask for and undenibly will get is a fleet of airplanes to be constantly at my disposal.

I also found out that frankly it was considered way back then a very cowardly thing to do for Quakers to leave England and that they were expected to just stick and take it. My namesake, Thomas Paul, did stick in England and took it. What he took was an axe and he lost his head!

[ForkaB]

Tom

Even New Englanders like me know that Penn was named after Pennsylvania.  He was lucky he didn't settle in Vermont, in which case his name might have been Vermin.

My guess is that the Paul's came from Africa through Pauland, possibly from near Gdansk......

[TEPaul]

Well, Rich, by this time I'm pretty familiar with the worth of your guesses!



Do you know what Pennsylvania means?

Actually, I'd always heard that young William Penn had become so dedicatedly disrespectful towards the King (things like refusing to get up when he came in the room or to address him properly) that they just decided to ship him off to the colonies to get the rude like urchin out of their hair since Penn's father was one of the King's closest friends and allies.

But I heard last week from an historian that William Penn actually in effect bought Pennsylvania by extinguishing a debt of the Crown's to his father.

When in the presence of that historian last week due to the fact I didn't know that Penn in effect bought Pennsylvania he  said to me; "You say you're from Pennsylvania and you didn't know that?"

So I said; "I didn't say I was FROM Pennsylvania, as actually I'm FROM New York, although I rarely go there anymore because it requires having to travel through that state of mindless houligans that Pat Mucci resides in called New Jersey!"

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

 Sorry for the ranting on this thread last night, I was in the process of competitive goal setting for the upcoming year.As such, all that stuff as fresh on my mind and I felt it was topical to the thread, as it really applies to strategy for ALL golfers and their abilty to negotiate ANY golf course.

Sorry if this was deemed to be inapproprite to some, even though as mentioned I thought it was relevant.
Happy golfing to all in 2005

[TEPaul]

"I was in the process of competitive goal setting for the upcoming year."

Michael:

As you know, ODDS are everything in life. Now that you've set your goals for 2005 what're your chances of winning the US Open?

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

TOM,
You never know.........Actually I do not think that is on my agenda this year..as a working stiff, I have to allocate my time where I think it will be worthwhile.
I am really excited about some swing changes that I have made over the past 2 months, so I am looking forward to playing again.

I plan to include a trip back home to play in the Birkdale Goblet in August that is always a thrill, and yesterday I recieved the dates for this years Crump...so I have not upset anybody there....yet...

[Doug Siebert]

In any case, I've checked the land transfers and there are some serious deficiencies. I will shortly be in touch with Philadelphia to inform them that I have a clear right to just take the airport back as my own but since I wouldn't want to be that kind of bother to my fellow Philadelphia brethern all I'll ask for and undenibly will get is a fleet of airplanes to be constantly at my disposal.

A FLEET of airplanes?  Just how much luggage do you have anyway?

[TEPaul]

Rich, you dumb cluck, that lost Indian tribe you come from was not the "We're the fugawees", they were the "Where the fugawees."

[TEPaul]

Doug:

What are you kidding? Luggage has very little to do with it. How many people are on GOLFCLUBATLAS? It looks to me like about 1500. What if I decide to take the entire population of GOLFCLUBATLAS on a world tour for a month or two free of charge playing courses all over the world? I'd say that would require about a Bakers dozen rather large airplanes, wouldn't you?

[Doug Siebert]

Tom,

OK, now I get it!


PS - put me down for a window seat