59 with an asterisk?
in [Golf]
|
Prev: Good riddance Congressman Charlie
Next: Golf Apps
From: R&B on 2 Aug 2010 18:46 On 2010-08-02 09:12:30 -0400, Tom said: > On Aug 2, 9:00�am, Wayne <way9...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> In article <t2dd56df2rqj5c95j3kdo8u3k4a4bss...(a)4ax.com>, >> �Howard Brazee <how...(a)brazee.net> wrote: >> >>> This year's Tour 59s have been on par 71 & par 70 courses. � � >> >>> I know par is just a number, and different courses have different >>> difficulties - David Duval's 59 wasn't in a difficult course. >>> Certainly a course that has lots of low scores makes a difference >>> though. >> >>> Are people going to asterisk these 59s? >> >> Personally, I would stick an asterisk beside Goydos' because it was >> lift, clean and place that day. >> >> Wayne > > If I recall correctly, Geiberger's 59 was also lift, clean and place. Correct. Randy
From: R&B on 2 Aug 2010 18:47 On 2010-08-02 18:47:53 -0400, dgold1958 said: > On Aug 2 2010 8:07 AM, Howard Brazee wrote: > >> This year's Tour 59s have been on par 71 & par 70 courses. >> >> I know par is just a number, and different courses have different >> difficulties - David Duval's 59 wasn't in a difficult course. >> Certainly a course that has lots of low scores makes a difference >> though. >> >> Are people going to asterisk these 59s? > > I am not going to asterisk anscore below 60. You still have hit it > close and make the putts. A 17 year old kid shot 57 this past week, and > Ishikawa shot a 58. I don't care that they were on courses only 6700 > yards long. That is still golfing your ball. > > By the way, if the course Duval shot a 59 on was so easy, why weren't > all of the golfers shooting 59? > > David > > --------� > RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com And note: Duval's 59 gave him the clubhouse lead. A short while later, Steve Pate still had a chance to tie him. But didn't. Randy
From: R&B on 2 Aug 2010 18:48 On 2010-08-02 18:47:37 -0400, R&B said: > On 2010-08-02 18:47:53 -0400, dgold1958 said: > >> On Aug 2 2010 8:07 AM, Howard Brazee wrote: >> >>> This year's Tour 59s have been on par 71 & par 70 courses. >>> >>> I know par is just a number, and different courses have different >>> difficulties - David Duval's 59 wasn't in a difficult course. >>> Certainly a course that has lots of low scores makes a difference >>> though. >>> >>> Are people going to asterisk these 59s? >> >> I am not going to asterisk anscore below 60. You still have hit it >> close and make the putts. A 17 year old kid shot 57 this past week, and >> Ishikawa shot a 58. I don't care that they were on courses only 6700 >> yards long. That is still golfing your ball. >> >> By the way, if the course Duval shot a 59 on was so easy, why weren't >> all of the golfers shooting 59? >> >> David >> >> --------� >> RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com > > > And note: Duval's 59 gave him the clubhouse lead. > > A short while later, Steve Pate still had a chance to tie him. > > But didn't. > > Randy I should have said Pate had a chance to tie him for the lead...not to tie him at 59 for the day. Randy
From: JohnO on 2 Aug 2010 18:53 On Aug 3, 12:07 am, Howard Brazee <how...(a)brazee.net> wrote: > This year's Tour 59s have been on par 71 & par 70 courses. > > I know par is just a number, and different courses have different > difficulties - David Duval's 59 wasn't in a difficult course. > Certainly a course that has lots of low scores makes a difference > though. > > Are people going to asterisk these 59s? If it's 70 not 72 because they turned a couple of par 5s into long par 4s then the score is still the same on the same golf course so equally worthy in all respects. Was this the case, or was it just a short course?
From: Howard Brazee on 3 Aug 2010 07:42
On Mon, 2 Aug 2010 15:53:10 -0700 (PDT), JohnO <johno1234(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> Are people going to asterisk these 59s? > >If it's 70 not 72 because they turned a couple of par 5s into long par >4s then the score is still the same on the same golf course so equally >worthy in all respects. > >Was this the case, or was it just a short course? I was wondering the same thing. -- "In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found, than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace to the legislature, and not to the executive department." - James Madison |