Allow me to illustrate people's misunderstanding of golf with the PGA Tour. One wouldn't normally think of the PGA Tour when thinking about how golf is played by normal people, but I think this comparison has merit. Feel free to rip me if you disagree, just be prepared to offer evidence, as opposed to simple shouts of "You're an idiot". I can get that at home...
By all counts, Tiger is likely to miss the cut this week. At last check before posting this, he is +4 with only 2 holes to go, far from the likely cut line of E. He might finish eagle, eagle, but I'm guessing no. Call me crazy.
So, having seen this, many people are going to say, Tiger's done, he's washed up, he can't play anymore, etc etc.
But they won't bother to look at who is shooting similar or worse scores: Andrew Johnston (BEEEEEEEEEEEEEEF!); Chad Campbell (he played pretty well last week, didn't he?); Danny Lee (he can play, no?); Bryson Dechambeau (wasn't he on the cover of a major mag last month?). Luke List and Jimmy Walker are a scant one shot better. JASON DAY IS PLUS 3!!!!!!!!!!!! DUSTIN JOHNSON IS PLUS 2!!!!!!!!!!!!
People confuse the nature of golf - we all hit bad shots and good shots, granted to varying degrees of each - with other sports. The penalty for lack of consistency in golf is simply brutal. For pros, it means being in contention one week and missing a cut the next. For low handicappers, it means shooting 75 one day and 88 the next. For average or lesser golfers, it means shooting 90, 100, or 110 in consecutive rounds (that's 20 shot spread) or shooting an 8 on one hole and a 1 on the next (I did that! Also followed up a 13 with a 2!).
When I hear someone can't hit the ball 100 yards, I understand what is meant: I can't hit it 100 yards straight enough on a consistent enough basis to shoot a reasonable score on most golf courses.
I still don't think most golfers and most architects truly understand that last sentence.
And I may well be among those people, Jeff.