Ron Mon - Latest Comments on Seven birdies are hard to ignore!

kevin williams [Visitor] in response to: Seven birdies are hard to ignore!

kevin williams [Visitor] — Sat, 22 Apr 2006 03:06:39 +0000

What's with tourneys giving Steven Bowditch entries? He always shoots 80+ and withdraws. When is enough enough?

Ronnie [Visitor] in response to: Seven birdies are hard to ignore!

Ronnie [Visitor] — Wed, 18 Jan 2006 23:28:23 +0000

Asia Guy, it is very seldom that a player wins two tournaments in a row. Paula shouldn't have been expected to play well again.

At the Evian she beat the pants off of the rest of the players. Nobody could stick with her.

Asia_Guy [Visitor] in response to: Seven birdies are hard to ignore!

Asia_Guy [Visitor] — Mon, 16 Jan 2006 21:06:49 +0000

Ronnie so what happened to Paula Creamer a week or so later at the Weetabix Women's British Open when she finished behind Michelle in the field?

Sometimes you have a great rounds and sometimes you don't. It all depends on how the swing is working that week.

John D [Visitor] in response to: Seven birdies are hard to ignore!

John D [Visitor] — Mon, 16 Jan 2006 02:48:26 +0000

Any way you slice it, Wie still has not won. Therefore a loser!!!

Norman [Visitor] in response to: Seven birdies are hard to ignore!

Norman [Visitor] — Mon, 16 Jan 2006 01:45:15 +0000

Jim, you raise an interesting point, because it sure does matter on a golf course, what type of rough the ball lands in.
If Tiger lands in short rough, he would probably class that as perfectly accurate.

I think the answer as to why they don't keep those stats is that they can't be bothered. It would mean extra work for them dividing out the categories.

Ron Mon [Member] in response to: Seven birdies are hard to ignore!

Ron Mon [Member] — Mon, 16 Jan 2006 00:49:52 +0000

Ronnie (my tocayo, as they say in Spanish) and EUP:

Are you aware of the difference between apples and oranges? If so, apply the theory to your argument: Wie, playing a 7060 yard course with better golfers (PGA tour has better golfers from equal tees) versus Creamer playing a 6252 yard course with lesser golfers. Which feat is more impressive? Are they even comparable? Come on, guys. Make a better argument than that!! (one exclamation point for each of you.)

Jim COULTHARD [Visitor] in response to: Seven birdies are hard to ignore!

Jim COULTHARD [Visitor] — Mon, 16 Jan 2006 00:46:09 +0000

Can anyone tell me why the short rough is lumped together with balls out of bounds as fairways missed? At least they should keep track of fairway, short rough, long rough, hazard statistics. There should be a fairway accuracy average that resembles a baseball slugging average. Maybe the fairway is worth 1.0, the short rough 0.9, the long rough 0.5, other things ZERO and really bad shots get negative numbers. People who really know golf should be able to come up with something.

extremely under par [Visitor] in response to: Seven birdies are hard to ignore!

extremely under par [Visitor] — Mon, 16 Jan 2006 00:29:00 +0000

Well said, Ronnie, my long lost cousin. I hope Rachel, the buxon nurse, is taking good care of you. I couln't agree more with you. Creamer is the birdie machine. Here birdie, there birdie, abd everwhere birdie with Creamer.