Really? When was the last time a weather forecast was accurate?

But yeah, just no. No way.

The number 62 isn't significant. The score in relation to the field is. What was Grace's z-score. I remember Jesper shooting 65 or so in a round in Houston when the winds were blowing. He was like 10 shots better than the field. Grace seemed to only be a few shots better than the crowd.

Was just thinking up different strategies that maybe no one had ever thought of.

When Miller shot 63 at Oakmont nobody cared what his z-score was. When Norman shot 63 at Augusta nobody cared what his z-score was. When Furyk shot 58 nobody cared what his z-score was.

Nobody cares what Grace's z-score was, nor will they ever. They will care that he is the first to shoot 62 in men's professional major golf history.

People only care about whether you won the tournament or not.

Not true at all. You could even argue the opposite, that nobody cares if your record low round came in a winning effort or not. Just google Jim Furyk 58 and see how long it's gonna take you to find out if he won that tournament or not. (2016 Traveler's Championship, finished T5)

I think the z-score is relevant if you watched the event/remember the conditions. I never saw Johnny Miller's 63, but I know Oakmont is a really hard golf course even in perfect weather conditions.. same with Norman shooting a 63 at Augusta, which is incredible no matter the conditions (63 at Augusta is just amazing, I don't care how soft/windless it is).
Seeing how easy Birkdale was playing yesterday will forever cheapen that 62 for me.

I recognize he's the first one to break that mental hurdle that a lot of people have been choking on forever, and there's something to be said about that. If this were the Rolex UK open or some random event, nobody would bat an eye at his round.

The mere fact that they were predicting a 62 as soon as coverage started leads me to view the round as less awesome.

I would have gone w/ something like the London Fish & Chips Invitational.

Well, for golf and stats nerds like the people on this forum ,we can have the discussion of what were the best individual rounds of all time, regardless of what gets discussed in the media. z-score is a good starting point, I also think a score relative to the second best score might also be interesting.

That tee shot/ensuing ruckus is how I'd imagine it'd be if I were playing in Spieth's shoes today. Must be nice to find those 100 yard block slices I hit from time to time.

This drop is a **** show.

Funny story, I worked for a newspaper company in college and we would deliver bundles to kids and stock the stores. Guy did exactly this. Kept on walking, got into his van, and drove off.

The store called to make sure he was OK, not about the damage.

Dude was quite an odd one.

Now back to your regular programming.

i did it once leaving a bowling alley as a teenager. i'm running about twice as fast as the guy in the video and fortunately the glass didn't break and i just bounced off onto my ass.

Has Miller ever seen a put he didn't think was easy?

what i'll always remember about Furyk's round:
13/14 fairways in regulation
18/18 greens in regulation
24 putts
turn at -8
birdie on 7 holes in a row

Guy in either the Pacific Northwest or Canada, I forget which, did this on like the 50th floor of some office building 20 years ago with some pretty thick glass, trying to prove hilariously to co-workers the glass wouldn't break.

It did.

.

toronto. i remember it well. i think i worked a couple of floors away - or a couple of floors away in next tower.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Garry_Hoy

personally i think the z-score is huge... although it assumes everyone plays the same conditions.

as per whether someone would intentionally take a horrible score to change next day's position, i don't think they'd get enough bang for their 3 strokes....... but if weather is really good early vs. really bad late then i would think being first off thursday vs. being last off might be worth alot.

i caddied recently. we were morning group. my player shot 3-under, 1 stroke off morning best.. afternoon had 2 players at 9-under. and a bunch better than 5 under... my player never mentioned anything about the sides of the draw but another player told me this is super common. and in our case the weather didn't seem that different. and of course usually mornings are better than afternoons. i'm thinking here in pacific northwest the course is really wet in the early morning.

At least we won a Darwin Award.

looks like canadian open coverage has now evolved into "first golfers teeing off to last golfers in" or something close to that - like a major, which i think most canadians would consider it if a canadian won.

that's great........ i remember 12 years ago or maybe further back when it was 90 minutes in the late afternoon on CTV on thursday/friday.

said only 5 or 6 players from world top 50. but the starting list looks reasonable to me. tons of top 50 players aren't american and of course lots of big name players outside top 50.... i think with hadwin's success and some canadian depth that the canadian interest can almost carry the tournament anyway.

it's just in a tough place in the schedule.

Tiger's National (also French, new Rolex series)
(Irish, new Rolex series)
(Scottish, new Rolex series)
British
Canadian
WGC @ Firestone
PGA
Greensboro
Playoffs

I mean, RBC has done a good job doling out the sponsor money to attract some players. But the elite elite always have been selective, and are rarely going to play 4 weeks straight, and even moreso as to the European guys.

Anyone going to the US Open? Think me and a few friends are going to make the 5 hour journey, get there Friday afternoon and attend Saturday's moving day session.