Im a big true linkswear fan

Ahhhh I see what you thought, only problem is you are wrong on how it is worded. It is you take the pin and the point of entry and go back on that line. So you would be going out into the lake and beyond on the other side. It is not from where you hit it and the point of entry.

Is there a specific thread where I should solicit gear advice?

I definitely need new shoes. Walking comfort is important.
I would probably benefit to some degree from new clubs (D-SW).

Let me know if that is here, the marketplace thread, the what did you buy thread or some other thread I'm missing.

Think there was a shoe thread, but haven't seen it in quite a while.

Not if it is agreed that it is virtually certain that the ball must have gone into the hazard.

EB, was the hazard marked yellow or red? It would be somewhat odd (maybe unfair) to have it marked yellow and not provide a drop zone. I say this assuming that playing from the other side of the pond is impractical (i.e. it's basically out of bounds or "too far"). If it's marked red (lateral), then hopefully you'll be able to find a spot within two clubs length (no closer to the hole) to drop.

Footjoy M-Sport are my shoe recommendations. Are you looking for something you can wear off the golf course? M-Sports are amazingly comfortable, and pretty cool looking, but they do have spikes/ aren't like the Ecco spikeless.

FWIW, the best ballers birdied 5 of the first 7 holes and closed out the scramblers who could only birdie the 2 par 5's 3&2. To make birdies you've got to either hit it close or make a putt and that's not easy for 6 handicaps to do with any regularity.

Next time I think they want to add one more similar player and play a 2 on 4 scramble.

BO

And variance had no relevance to the outcome, and you and your boy can expect to birdie the five of the first seven holes with regularity, and next time, the scramblers should only expect to birdie 2 holes.

--I'm worse than a six handicap averaging over 2 birdies a round for my last 15 rounds.

True, we should have been -6 as I failed to make birdie on a short par 4 from 41 yards short of the pin.

Well, I did have a little more information before making this wager. There had been a couple of wagers where 5 of them (although only 4 were allowed to putt) had scrambled for 9 holes and they shot -6 both times. Now take away two of them (and almost certainly their best players) and what do you expect they will shoot? I figured 4 under at best for an average, and if our team can't best ball -4 for 9 holes then we deserve to lose.

And one more thing, they were so confident in their scrambling ability that I negotiated if the match ends in a tie then we win.

Like many I asked about this, my partner was very hesitant to make the bet until I pulled him aside and explained my thinking. After he saw my thought process he was good to go.

BO

I missed the part where you said it was a nine hole match. Oops. Not that changes much in terms of who is the better team, but just the outcome of their getting only 2 birds..

Anyway, sick playing, you seem like a birdie machine.

Can I ask how much was played for? I'm the type of player that will play with or without an edge assuming the $$ isn't too big. I actually think it makes it more fun to be the underdog.

$100 per team. Was a team effort, partner made 2 of the 5 birds.

I just thought it an interesting wager, one of those where initially it looks completely lopsided.

BO

Have no I idea why no one pointed you to this thread. GL

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/93...today-1339913/

I just added the following entry to my golf bucket list:

Golf with Arod's Cousin

this. Hit it again from 130

As per my previous post, in the R&A rules, if it is 'virtually certain' that the ball has gone into the hazard, it is treated as such - do the PGA rules not have the same thing?

quick question that i'm just curious about:

how does it work with handicapped tournament play when there is a + handicap involved? e.g. i'm a 16 handicap, so i get the 16 strokes on the 16 hardest holes. but for a +3 handicap, does the player GIVE a stroke on the 3 easiest holes, or just play straight up?

I actually played in a stableford competition with a +3 a few years ago, and yes, he gave up a stroke on the three easiest holes.

Just had my 2nd eagle, par 5 510 yds- driver 250 yds and hit my hybrid fat and 150 yds to go on my 3,hit 8 iron n landed abt 20 feet away and just rolled in, my other partner was waiting on green and had a great look at it

lol. My internet persona is a lot different from the real world and especially the golf world. I'm quiet, curteous, on-topic, and I am not a big drinker or gambler on the course. I just try to blend in and focus on my shots.

But yeah if you're ever down here - hit me up. I golfed with a guy here from 2p2 once but he never came back after the hacking. And I tried to PM him several times on oob by their PM software sucks ass and takes like 2 months to send. Anyone else have problems with this?

In Ed's post he said he wasn't sure if it hung up in the rough or not, so in that case he can't be virtually certain.

Yes he can. If there is only rough and no place else that would be reasonable for the ball to be you can call it wet. The virtually certain wording is meant more for hazards back in the woods where the ball could have hit a tree and went anywhere. That doesn't seem to be the case here.

Glad that you can confirm the PGA ruling to be the same as R&A.

We have a couple of holes at our course where we can be virtually certain that a wayward ball is in the hazard from the tee (if not found short or long), plus a few where we can't be sure.

Also a couple where the same applies on the second shot. We just apply the rule fairly and if we have any sense we ask our playing partners to watch our tee or second shots on those holes.

I understand what you are saying, but it depends on the rough and how far the water is from the green. If its cut short and the ball can't hide then you can safely call it wet. But if its thick and / or there is native grass and there is 20 yards of it between the green and the water and the ball bounced on the green then its lost.

If that is what is behind the green, and therefore you can't be virtually certain that the ball made the water, then yes, you have to go back to where you played from.

But you wouldn't do this often, because you would have decided beforehand whether the ball was virtually certain to be in the hazard or not. The situation that you are offering where there is thick rough behind a green and just before a water hazard is very unlikely.

You would have decided beforehand if the ball might be lost or if it might be virtually certain to be in the hazard - because you can't take a provisional ball for a ball that is virtually certain to be in a hazard