Favorite team:USA 
Location:Houston, TX by way of Louisiana
Biography:
Interests:
Occupation:
Number of Posts:13589
Registered on:11/14/2005
Online Status:Not Online

Recent Posts

Message
quote:


The saga lasts for hundreds, maybe thousands of years if one goes back to the First Men. Yet it seems it stays stuck in Middle Ages forever. No medical advances, should have discovered gunpowder by now, It's as if the civilization stays stuck in place forever.


There was some. The first men were basically wiped out because the Andals had steel weapons.

Also, you could theorize why major advances haven't happened. You have unpredictable seasons. At any day, you could have the start of a catastrophic winter that lasts a decade. If you know that is around the corner, most of your attention is just on survival rather than improvement.
quote:

This incentivizes people to hold their kids back and you end up with a bunch of 12yr olds playing in 11U and so on.


How do you hold back a kid in youth sports? I can see an argument for issues with holding kids back in school for sports reasons only, but you post doesn't seem to be about school.

re: Arcos Golf Sensors

Posted by DestrehanTiger on 7/23/26 at 1:58 pm to
quote:

Do you still use it? Do you like the new interface in the dashboard?



I stopped a few years back. I got my clubs regripped and just never put the sensors back in. While I really enjoyed looking back at a round and seeing how great or poor each shot was, I just realized the joy from post-round was taking away from the joy during the round.

- I was focusing too much on remembering to tap my watch instead of just focusing on the putt
- I was too conscious of taking practice swings too far from my ball. This was mostly on teeboxes when we were waiting. If I was just swinging around to get loose, I would be worried it was tracking it as an extra shot
- Logging penalties was a pain.
- Actually the UI on Shot Scope watches wasn't great either.

re: Arcos Golf Sensors

Posted by DestrehanTiger on 7/23/26 at 11:03 am to
quote:

If you're really interested, then I would recommend looking into Shot Scope sensors. NO SUBSCRIPTIONS for the same data.
Sensors are a blessing and a curse.

You will get your ACTUALLY yardage, not what you think. That can be depressing.
Also, if you fat that 6-iron and it only goes 140 yards, it affects your data, you just have to remember to edit that.


Unless something has changed since I was using it a few years ago, Shot Scope uses a P Number for distances. It weeds out statistical outliers like a fat 6-iron so you can get a good idea of how far the club goes when you hit it correctly.

quote:

Also, the tags will not screw into the metal counter-balance putter ends on Superstroke grips. You have to get an adapter, and they only have them for Arrcos.


When I had to get rid of the putter sensor when I got a Superstroke grip, I actually realized I liked the manual entry of putts on the watch. While you are behind the ball reading the putt, just tap the button on the watch. Then tap it at the pin. I found that it required way less editing after the round than having Shot Scope sense my putts.

re: Arcos Golf Sensors

Posted by DestrehanTiger on 7/23/26 at 10:02 am to
As others have said, I don't think the benefit is knowing your distances. If you are at the point of spending money on them, then you probably have a decent idea of how far you hit your clubs.

The real benefit is strokes gained data to pinpoint the areas where you can improve. Right now, you may see that you had 28 putts and you must've putted great that day. The strokes gained may show that your approach game was terrible, you short game was great, and your putting was average.

Having said that, I think it comes down to 2 types of people that would like it. Stats people and people that have time to actually practice in the areas it identifies as weaknesses. I fall in the former category. I enjoyed knowing my strokes gained numbers. However, it eventually got to be too annoying to continue. It wasn't that it was impacting my pace of play, but it was in the back of my mind that I couldn't practice swing too far away from my ball. Also, I was finding that I needed to make too many post round edits. This was with Shotscope about 4 years ago. So, maybe the technology is that much better now.

re: Golf and speakers

Posted by DestrehanTiger on 7/22/26 at 1:24 pm to
I actually think a competent starter is way more important than marshalls, at least at a public course. I played Tradition on Friday last week. We get to the starter about 5 mins before our tee time. He tells us to go ahead. We notice that there is a single on the tee ahead of us. I ask if we are with him. The starter says, "I don't care, you can play with him or not. Doesn't matter to me". Turned out it was one of the rare Friday afternoons at a public course in Houston where it was not crowded and we played in 3 hours. However, this starter could have caused real issues with the pace of play by letting small groups that are supposed to be together go off separately.

If the starter gets people off on their tee time in threesomes and foursomes, that will be a huge help in keeping up pace.

re: Golf and speakers

Posted by DestrehanTiger on 7/22/26 at 10:54 am to
quote:

We get to #4, a small par 3 again, and they are chipping onto the green. We sit in our cart at the tee box waiting and they look at us, waive us to play through. Finally, I thought, but it sucked that they sat there watching. Nothing adds pressure like a group of people watching you play through so they can resume playing, but I was just thankful that my son and I were going to finally get to play at our pace. I hit from the teebox and go into the water. frick! I hit again and overshoot the green.

At that point I was like "screw it, we're gonna just pass them up and go to #5 then replay this hole twice on the back 9".

They have no idea my plan to just skip the hole. As soon as I hit onto the other side of the green, they resume playing. Did they not know what allowing someone to play through means? I was flabbergasted that they were going to resume playing their hole as soon as I hit after they let me play through.


While I would normally just get out of your way to allow you to finish before playing through, I could see them thinking to just proceed with some of their chips and mark their balls while you were driving to the green. There's really no point to it since they would have to wait for you to tee off and hit your second shot on the next hole, but I could still see that line of thinking.

Also, is this you?

re: Golf and speakers

Posted by DestrehanTiger on 7/22/26 at 9:07 am to
quote:

Meh, it's my only complaint honestly.


I'm the same way. I've never told anyone to stop playing music, but I'd rather play without it. I usually listen to music/podcasts to make something monotonous more enjoyable. Playing golf with my friends is my favorite thing to do. I don't need music to make it better. I'd rather hear the sounds of the course and be able to have a conversation.

I realize others do not feel this way, which is why I never complain out loud.
The Christmas movies can be fun to make fun of while you watch. It's like a Christmas tradition.
If there were any on this board, this thread probably drove them away.
quote:

Soccer Is All Middle



While I disagree with most of the article, I think this is a big a reason as any why Americans have a tough time becoming soccer fans. In all of our other sports, there are lots of small moments that have stat indications that you can cheer for: every shot made in basketball, hits in baseball, first downs in football. Soccer doesn't really have that.

While we can appreciate a great pass out of the back to relieve pressure and start an attack, if there is no goal, there isn't really anything to look back on to remember it.

This is not an argument against soccer. I can appreciate the little things when I watch, but it just takes longer for a new viewer to appreciate it.
quote:

And you paid for it in your cable package before. It's not like you were watching for free.



Right, but I wasn't paying extra for it. It came with all the other channels I already paid for. Now, I still have YouTubeTV, but I have to pay extra for Peacock. I understand it as a business, but I am just pointing out that the barriers of entry to fandom was much lower.
quote:

Wearing neutral colors at an away match would be ideal as well and is standard.


This fascinates me about the difference in sports cultures between the US and the UK. For golf, the US is brash and out of control. In soccer in the UK, away team fans have to sit in designated sections with lines of security up and down the steps to prevent them from beating the shite out of each other. I'm not arguing that US team sports fans are choir boys, but, for the most part, you can sit anywhere in a stadium in your teams colors and be fine. Obviously, Philly is the exception.
quote:


Don't pick any of the big five (Liverpool, Man City, Man U, Arsenal, Chelsea).


Don't listen to this. Watch for a season and pick the team that speaks to you. It's difficult enough being stuck with a team due to geography or legacy fandom in your home country. Don't limit yourself picking a team in another country because you don't want to look like a bandwagoner. Who gives a shite. You won't run into anyone in the streets questioning why you are a fan of the team you choose.
quote:

Paramount Plus will get you Champions League games which is great but for Premier League you will need a Peacock Account.



It's a shame there is more of a barrier to becoming an EPL fan than 16 years ago when I started getting interested. It wasn't perfect when I started trying to watch, but, eventually, every single EPL game was available on NBC Sports. it was awesome. Now, it's just another service you have to pay for.
quote:


It seems like their top 12 is just much better than ours. Henley, Spaun, English, Morikawa, Griffin… hell maybe even Burns just don’t seem like that guy in a Ryder Cup. Although 3 of those were automatic qualifiers last year


We are still over a year away from Adare, but I really think that Burns and Young will be top players going into that one. It can be argued that Burns has sucked in Ryder Cups, but so did Fitz until he grew into the really good pro that he is now. I can see the same thing happening for Burns.

The US needs to hope some random guys don't win majors next year. I know Spaun was actually pretty good in the 2025 Ryder Cup and had a good year that year (more than just the Players and US Open), but his play this season shows it was more of an anomaly.
quote:

It really speaks to how serious we take it vs the Euros.


I really think we should stop trying to make the players care about it more. It's not working. Lean the other way. Try to make the prep as close to a normal event as possible. Sure, build up everything to make it different for the fans, but leave the behind the scenes stuff out for the players. They can't fake it. It does mean more to the Euros. So, let the US team go into the event like the machines they are for every other event and win the cup that way.
quote:

My argument is that it IS part of the course for this tournament.


I'd argue that completely getting rid of tio would make the tournament less exciting. Guys might not go for tucked pins because they could miss and end up next to a grandstand having to hit sideways just to get out. The shot wouldn't have been a huge miss, but now they're lucky to make a bogey.
quote:

But a giant divot in the fairway that was made that day is a permanent part of the course?


I'm assuming this is retorical, but I never made that argument.
quote:

It is part of the course so it shouldn’t be called a temporary obstruction.


But it's not part of the course. I'm with you guys in thinking TIO needs to be reworked, but grandstands are definitely not part of the course.
quote:

Well that grandstand wasn’t here in the 1800’s


Are you referring to the grandstands that weren't there in 2025?