Yeah and hasn't technology changed the game enough? There has to become a point in time when we have to protect the integrity of the game. If rangefinders dont work then the next argument is carts.

Why do you think pace of play is too slow in the first place? Is it because when you go out by yourself and use one it takes less time to play?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMmoU...e_gdata_player

Lol from this thread. GOAT ending to this video.

That video is just so awesome. Love the ending too. So LOL

Here is another good thread thats relevant to what has been discussed here lately.

http://www.golfwrx.com/forums/topic/...ors-overrated/

first sentence in the first post.

"I appear to be in the minority"

im under the impression the you think majors are overrated?

"The greatest players of all time we/are able to get it done when it matters the most. Regular events don't have that sense of urgency about them. They are like "If I play bad this week, I've got next week." Majors have a now or nothing feel. It means more and the better players can rise to that ultimate challenge. Like I said before, the majors are a self fufilling prophecy when it comes to their importance."

Perfect example of why "18 > 14" is the most important stat and why Tiger cannot be crown GOAT until he wins more

Just read the thread and dont post anything about it here because well we dont care. You have your 1 sided opinion we have ours. You also cherry picked like one post out of there. There are tons of people in that thread that think they are overrated now. Thats also probably the worst example one can make to say 18>14

Edit: Just now looking through this thread more and there isnt a clear winner in that thread. Not sure if this is true but many seem to think so, is that Jack is the one who started to put alot of emphasis on the majors because he was winning them, not because others said they were the tourneys to win. Jack also said he wanted to win more tourneys than anyone and when he realized he wasnt going to catch Snead he is the one that said he started to focus more on majors

"I do think majors are overrated. They all have a system which assures that the field will not be the strongest possible (open qualifying, club pros, masters limited field). We see the best players in the world in many other events throughout the year now, not just the majors. WGC events have strong field, and the Players has the strongest field of the year. This is the same reason I really don't see golf fitting back in the Olympics. We see the best in the world compete against each other about 10 times every year, The Olympics will just be the 11th time that year"

Here is a gentleman who thinks majors are overrated. He makes a statement about the strength of the field. I would agree if that was the only thing that goes into it, but he ignores the fact that a WGC setup does not compare to a major championship setup. The major championship venue is going to challenge the player at a much higher level.

what are your thoughts?

My thoughts are why does the set up matter as much? All players are playing the same set up and that matters much more. They all are competing on the same course same conditions. All it means is you may have to go more under par to win

What if i said there is too much emphasis on strength of field, and from numbers 50-80 in the world and the next 100 guys are all about the same level of talent and at any given time could break out and win. thoughts?

What exactly are you getting at? How can one place too much emphasis on the strength of the field? The tour is far deeper now and Nxt already listed tons of numbers that shows the stroke differences between the first place guy and the last place guy. So I guess I just have no idea what your getting at with this

Save your lol's and my gods for muck, they don't impress me.

So much of the game comes down to trust and if you think every player / caddie are FIGJAM and bones, you are wrong. Looking down at a calibrated number takes away a ton of uncertainty.

Uncertainty leads to tentativeness.

Tentativeness leads to poorer quality golf shots.

I would say that you are an idiot.

There is significant difference between 50-80th in the world and 150-180th, but again you just choose to ignore the numbers.

I guess there is no difference between Tiger and the 70th-120th player in the world.

LOLOLO

If your playing at the highest level one can play (PGA Tour) and you cant trust your caddie, then you need to look for a new caddie plain and simple. Id guess that most players trust their caddies or they wouldnt be their caddie

A major championship field vs. a good field such as a WGC or a difficult PGA tour stop doesn't compare because majors only come around 4 times a year and in turn cause more more stress and pressure to win. There is always the "next" tour event or WGC.

From a players perspective, do you think there is as much emphasis put on winning a WGC as there is to win a Major?

Well if your looking at it that way then yes since there are only 4 WGC events every year also

itt trust is an absolute.





In the real world, humans doubt.

If you think there is that much uncertainty on the PGA Tour between players and their caddy's yardages I'ds say you are wrong.

Not so sure. The majority of tour players probably trust that their caddies are giving them correct yardages. Also the majority of tour players ultimately decide what club they are pulling and what line they are hitting the putt on

No, there is a huge difference between Tiger and number 70 in the world, but as you've seen in past, this year in fact, the best in the world can get beat. Granted it was in a match play format, but anything can happen. You can continue to "look at the numbers" but if you think there is a significant difference between the 150th and 180th player in the world you are mistaken. keep LOLOLOLOL you douche

I didn't weight the factor, I argued that the factor existed and that a rangefinder reduced or eliminated that factor.

i wish we could get a poll of the players to prove you wrong here. you might get 5% of players, and those would just be trolls that would say a WGC event is up there with a major.

Lol man your dumb. First you said the next 100. Now your trying to narrow it to 30 so you dont look like a moron.

Do you think Im being serious? Im looking at it like you would for all arguments and your inability to do math. WGC events have far better fields though so maybe ask a tour player about that

You guys love taking personal shots, hope it makes you feel better about yourself at the end of the day.

Sure, there is a difference between the number 50 player in the world and number 150, but its not a significant difference. The number 50 player in the world doesn't have that much better of a chance than the number 150 player in the world to win a tournament. Especially not a major where variance comes into play at a much higher level

you said

and I quote

and I bold

and I underline

"from numbers 50-80 in the world and the next 100 guys are all about the same level of talent"

there is probably a 1 to1.5 SHOT PER ROUND difference there. So I will keep LOLOLOLOLing