You Vs. Jordan Spieth....you get 2 mulligans for each shot

[drpugilist]

I have been to many PGA events and also attended the Ryder Cup this last fall.....which if you have never done....put it on your bucket list if you are a big golf fan.

I am amazed at how many great shots they hit and how long some of the players are off the tee. One event we were at I commented to my son we had not seen any really bad shots and we had been there for 8 hours. Two seconds later Sergio hit one over my head into the woods.

Assume a guy is a good stick and normally shoots 78. Those 6 shots above par might come from just 3 or 4 bad shots in the round. An OB or yanking an iron or two. Getting to take those out of play brings that person down to scratch. Making a few other shots better brings it down further.....holing a few more putts even further. It will be interesting to hear what the poster who said he was going to play a round and see how much his score improved. With 3 mulligan for a good stick....it is just a matter of how low the score would be. The question would be if the iron shot is now at 15 feet versus 25 feet.....with three putts would he make enough of them to improve his score significantly (two putting from 25 feet or 2 putting from 15 feet didnt really help the golfer).

What I think you are missing is that every shot they hit are not great. Just look at the British Open on Sunday....no way in hell were 95% of Jordan iron shots where he wanted to be....on 18 holes that would be 17 iron shots out of 18 shots. Also just like the average guy the pro can miss a 3 foot putt.

On an easy dog track....the average Joe's ability to keep pace or pass the pro becomes more difficult. You have used the argument about how much tougher the PGA course is and how much worse a players score would be. Of course any harder course your score goes up....but with mulligans it should go down if you have any kind of stick. You are also not taking into account the yardage difference. You seem to discount this like it is no big deal. It is a big deal for the pros and a big deal for average Joe. In fact it is the number one reason the players with distance have dominated in golf. It has been this way for quite some time and it will be in the future. (Jordan on of the few to not fall in this category). Sounds to me like the rationale that size doesnt matter.

The best comparison of what a golfer would be to score would be is a best ball scramble that every golfer has played in. So the question is if at Hazeltine using best ball team from the white tees and they can shoot 10 under (which a group of single digits can and do all the time) can Jordan do that from the tips on the same day? Could but I say doubtful on almost all days. Put a bunch of 20 handicap golfers together....Jordan kicks their ass because they dont have the ability to hit enough good/great shots. Tell me your argument why Jordan would win. My example I am using a championship course.

are you a good player?

 

[drpugilist]

I have been to many PGA events and also attended the Ryder Cup this last fall.....which if you have never done....put it on your bucket list if you are a big golf fan.

I am amazed at how many great shots they hit and how long some of the players are off the tee. One event we were at I commented to my son we had not seen any really bad shots and we had been there for 8 hours. Two seconds later Sergio hit one over my head into the woods.

Assume a guy is a good stick and normally shoots 78. Those 6 shots above par might come from just 3 or 4 bad shots in the round. An OB or yanking an iron or two. Getting to take those out of play brings that person down to scratch. Making a few other shots better brings it down further.....holing a few more putts even further. It will be interesting to hear what the poster who said he was going to play a round and see how much his score improved. With 3 mulligan for a good stick....it is just a matter of how low the score would be. The question would be if the iron shot is now at 15 feet versus 25 feet.....with three putts would he make enough of them to improve his score significantly (two putting from 25 feet or 2 putting from 15 feet didnt really help the golfer).

What I think you are missing is that every shot they hit are not great. Just look at the British Open on Sunday....no way in hell were 95% of Jordan iron shots where he wanted to be....on 18 holes that would be 17 iron shots out of 18 shots. Also just like the average guy the pro can miss a 3 foot putt.

On an easy dog track....the average Joe's ability to keep pace or pass the pro becomes more difficult. You have used the argument about how much tougher the PGA course is and how much worse a players score would be. Of course any harder course your score goes up....but with mulligans it should go down if you have any kind of stick. You are also not taking into account the yardage difference. You seem to discount this like it is no big deal. It is a big deal for the pros and a big deal for average Joe. In fact it is the number one reason the players with distance have dominated in golf. It has been this way for quite some time and it will be in the future. (Jordan on of the few to not fall in this category). Sounds to me like the rationale that size doesnt matter.

The best comparison of what a golfer would be to score would be is a best ball scramble that every golfer has played in. So the question is if at Hazeltine using best ball team from the white tees and they can shoot 10 under (which a group of single digits can and do all the time) can Jordan do that from the tips on the same day? Could but I say doubtful on almost all days. Put a bunch of 20 handicap golfers together....Jordan kicks their ass because they dont have the ability to hit enough good/great shots. Tell me your argument why Jordan would win. My example I am using a championship course.

now wait a sec. the thread topic is with two or three muliigans could i beat spieth. i dont think i or any other 8, 9 or 10 handicapper could. of course a scratch golfer or a low handicap player may be able to. ive never played to that level so i dont know what its like!

 

[NorthernStar]

I used to play to a 2 or 3 handicap.....I won the club championship one year and took third the next year about 10 years ago...that was when I played at least 3 times a year. So I would consider myself a decent player. I dont get to play as much anymore......you get older and being able to concentrate for 18 holes is much harder ( I actually think that is a bigger impact on my game than being older and less flexible......plus I fight the dreaded YIPS...a golfers worse nightmare!!). I still can make a significant number of very good shots in a round. The question would be if it takes a significant number of great shots not just good shots to score significantly better. Now I probably play to an 8 ( I shot a 38 last nine holes I played....end of last year (my game gets better as the season goes on in Minnesota)....in fact it was the last round I played of the year I shot a 73). I dont keep a handicap anymore because I dont play in tournaments anymore. I am fairly avid golf fan...following the tour and I still enjoy getting out and playing. I think the new technology has made up for me getting older. With new technology I can hit a drive 260 to 280. I couldn't do that when I was younger. The new technology allows you to hit it further....but more importantly the sweet spot is so much bigger.

I just commented a few weeks ago....I wonder what I would have shot 30 years ago with todays technology. My guess is I would have definitely been a scratch golfer or maybe plus one or two. I was a much better putter in those days and I think as I got older I dont read the greens as well. When I play with my son who caddied at Hazeltine for 8 or 9 years...his read is almost always different from my read and his is usually the right read. Age, glasses....not sure but if I stand over a putt and think I see the line....I know I have a better chance of making it.

The Ryder Cup as a fan is spectacular event to attend.....fans getting wild and cheering versus the polite claps for everyone at a PGA event.

 

[EasyMoney]

I'd agree that if some guy is a 0-2 handicap that that guy would have a shot to beat spieth with the mulligans and the distance. But lets be honest, about 0.5% of golfers are scratch golfers. and like 99% of those guys wouldn't touch scratch on a PGA course. A pretty good golfer is considered to be someone that can break 80 fairly regularly, and thats like 5% of golfers. And again, those guys would be happy with a 90-95 on a PGA course. So your golfer that is better then 95% of golfers shoots 92 at sawgrass. Meanwhile Spieth is generally in the 60's. I'm sure the 3 mulligans and the distance would help alot but does it make up like 25 strokes?

 

[Ricboff]

I used to play to a 2 or 3 handicap.....I won the club championship one year and took third the next year about 10 years ago...that was when I played at least 3 times a year. So I would consider myself a decent player. I dont get to play as much anymore......you get older and being able to concentrate for 18 holes is much harder ( I actually think that is a bigger impact on my game than being older and less flexible......plus I fight the dreaded YIPS...a golfers worse nightmare!!). I still can make a significant number of very good shots in a round. The question would be if it takes a significant number of great shots not just good shots to score significantly better. Now I probably play to an 8 ( I shot a 38 last nine holes I played....end of last year (my game gets better as the season goes on in Minnesota)....in fact it was the last round I played of the year I shot a 73). I dont keep a handicap anymore because I dont play in tournaments anymore. I am fairly avid golf fan...following the tour and I still enjoy getting out and playing. I think the new technology has made up for me getting older. With new technology I can hit a drive 260 to 280. I couldn't do that when I was younger. The new technology allows you to hit it further....but more importantly the sweet spot is so much bigger.

I just commented a few weeks ago....I wonder what I would have shot 30 years ago with todays technology. My guess is I would have definitely been a scratch golfer or maybe plus one or two. I was a much better putter in those days and I think as I got older I dont read the greens as well. When I play with my son who caddied at Hazeltine for 8 or 9 years...his read is almost always different from my read and his is usually the right read. Age, glasses....not sure but if I stand over a putt and think I see the line....I know I have a better chance of making it.

The Ryder Cup as a fan is spectacular event to attend.....fans getting wild and cheering versus the polite claps for everyone at a PGA event.

this sport has really changed with tech. Nuts. They can't seem to make a course long enough. US Open was 7700 yds..but wider fairways and soft conditions was green light for the bombers............. Some hit a 3-wood 300yds. Hybrids make 2-3 irons obsolete- way way way easier to hit, higher, softer. Look what the pros did to Glen Abbey last week (Canadian Open) geez. -21 was the winner! Few hit drive and wedge at the par 5 18th, lol. The rough was brutal, but soft conditions exposed the course. I'v eplayed Abbey following an open-- rough is silly. Takes time to find the fuckin ball as it drops into the rough! vanishes!! These guys make it look silly easy. Across the pond, does the R&A have a course on its rotation that's suitable for todays tech? We saw Royal Birkdale get crushed, its only defense was the weather. A 62 was shot!! AT A MAJOR!!......i got the new Cobra F7 driver. NUTS. Longer and more foregiving


anyway, for the golfers out there enjoy the following. Moe was a freak. Some say he was autistic. He'd hold a clinic at Abbey every year during The Canadian Open week. The pros would stand and watch...Price, Couples. Straight shot-- over and over and over again. Freak show........was a character. Two things i take from Moe; know your swing and stay with the shot.............RIP Moe


never gets old, Part 1;

Moe: 'I only see the good stuff '


interviewer: 'what's the secret move in golf Moe'
Moe: 'my vertical drop and horizontal release.........the feeling of greatness' @)


Moe did not give a shit about his missing 4 top incisors....

 

[Ricboff]

part 2

of course, Moe would never show at induction day at The Hall of Fame. As the interviewer said, `it would frighten him``

Moe: `only purity of technique....... That I know I could do``

he does a nice trevino at 12;30

can feel the at pain at 14:30

Moe: ``they never came and saw me (family)....they never encouraged me , they discouraged me``

Moe: ``only 2 golfers in the history of this game had 15 clubs`; bobby jones and jack nicklaus`