@Absaroka_Ranger@philthatremains She confessed she did it and is trying to escape the death penalty with an insanity plea. There's no presumption of innocence in this case at all.
@HoppyHacker72 Why don't these tournaments calculate your HC after the tournament? Include these rounds in the calculation before being the net scores. It won't fix everything, but it would take some sand out of the bag at least
@BoundaryBreak No kidding? My wife and I discussed going night before last and decided not to because last time we went the chili quest was discontinued. I guess we'll try again soon!
@LouStagner What do you think about reducing the driver size and MOI and also banning hollow headed irons for the pros only?
Both would add emphasis on ball striking, at least a little.
Baseball uses metal bats through college, so having equipment steps isn't unheard of.
I understand where Tim is going here to the extremes of the answers, but let me migrate to the center a little (closer to American politics as they are).
"From each according to their ability and to each according to their need." A Marxist creed that sums up social welfare systems.
The red button will deny more of those who who authentically need because they believe there are too many not contributing according to their ability. They believe that will destabilize the system of it reaches a critical mass. They're 100% correct in this assessment, but nobody knows where that critical mass is, either. We won't know we're past the threshold until it's way too late to correct.
The blue button prioritizes the "to each according to their need" and believe that they must allow people to take advantage of the system (although I believe some actively deny the possibility anyone would do such a thing) in order to not risk hurting anyone who might actually need help. They either don't believe in the critical mass point of failure, don't think we're anywhere near it, or actively want it to help destroy the system. The first two groups are some combination of naive and toxicity empathetic. The last one I would classify as evil.
If you collapse the system suddenly, you'll hurt more people than the red button folks, as those with extra will have empathy on neighbors and friends, some of whom will get their needs met without government assistance.
But when you take everything in an attempt to destroy a system, you get Holodomor, Great Famine, etc.
The issue with these moral dilemmas is projection.
Did you think to include infants or the infirm?
Most assume "everyone" and imagine people like themselves.
Im not saying either choice is right or wrong but consider what it means when some people can't work. Consider what it means when some people refuse
I think this depends on a few things:
1) is our golfer a 5hcp who plays the whites or the tips? The tips player will be much better acclimated to tour distances.
2) he'll play closer to 150 rounds that year, assuming he takes advantage of Wednesday practice rounds.
3) does our player get tour level coaching?
I believe the tips guy gets his hcp into the +2 range by year's end and does better than DL at least once. Especially if he gets access to a tour level coach.
A few things you should know, if you got retweeted by Michael Malice, you've either written a Nobel Prize worthy treatise, or you're the epitome of what he was trying to explain.
As to your assertion, 51% (50.5-51.49%) candidates have a 7-1 WL record. 48.5% (48.00-48.99) are 2-5. Both of the wins came at the expense of another 48% vote getter, too. None of them are against the other, either btw. Which set do you want your candidate in if you have to blindly choose without regard to individual states?