What do you think of this absurd comment

RRfireblade said:
No, exactly.

If all of pool simply consists of just one of the many skillsets equired of in golf then golf has to be harder by complexity alone.

Now lets even disregard that for argument sake and say they both consist purely of putting, in golf you have to put on 18 different sized "tables" , radically variable contours,speeds and surface condition including but not limited to the fact that it also happens on grass. Whereas "putting" on a pool table is well.......like putting putting on a pool table. ;) Plus you can miss in pool, even on purpose, and still win. There are no misses in golf....ever. In fact some misses in golf cost you twice as many stroked. :)

Either way, its obvious he has little or no golf experience. Otherwise many of his comments just don't make sense.

Funny how Earl, not at all known for his level headed and rational thinking throughout his entirely career would all of a sudden be taken seriously over comments well outside his world of knowledge.

Crazy people.
Click to expand...

OK, I'm going to post this once again for your benefit:

"Earl said that the hardest part of golf is putting and that pool is all putting- therefore harder than golf."

Figure it out or don't.

As for your comment about Earl's knowledge of golf- please go up-thread and read.
 
risky biz said:
OK, I'm going to post this once again for your benefit:

"Earl said that the hardest part of golf is putting and that pool is all putting- therefore harder than golf."

Figure it out or don't.

As for your comment about Earl's knowledge of golf- please go up-thread and read.
Click to expand...

You and many others act like whatever Earl says is law and therefore should be defended.

I disagree that putting is the hardest part of the game. The short game is much harder in my opinion. Putting is not hard, but is important. Chipping out of the rough or a sand trap on a crowned green with back spin takes a hell of a lot more skill than reading a green.
 
risky biz said:
OK, I'm going to post this once again for your benefit:

"Earl said that the hardest part of golf is putting and that pool is all putting- therefore harder than golf."

Figure it out or don't.

As for your comment about Earl's knowledge of golf- please go up-thread and read.
Click to expand...

Well it is quite simple, the logic of his statement clearly contradicts itself and is clearly wrong.

:)
 
jason said:
You and many others act like whatever Earl says is law and therefore should be defended.

I disagree that putting is the hardest part of the game. The short game is much harder in my opinion. Putting is not hard, but is important. Chipping out of the rough or a sand trap on a crowned green with back spin takes a hell of a lot more skill than reading a green.
Click to expand...

When I see five pounds of sand fly into the air and the ball land three feet from the hole I sometimes wonder if it was superlative skill or just a wild swing that turned out good. But that's just me.
 
Baxter said:
I've played golf at a high level, and obviously I play pool as well. I don't think one is harder than the other. In a lot of ways golf is more difficult, but pool is more difficult in other ways. Apples and oranges here folks.
Click to expand...

Apples and oranges... couldn't agree more.
 
matteroner said:
I bet Tiger could get closer to beating earl in pool than earl could get to tigers golf score ....that's for sure ....
Click to expand...

What makes you think so? I'd say the exact opposite. Earl says he's shot in the 60's many times. Tiger doesn't shoot in the 60's every time. But my guess is that Tiger has NEVER broke and ran a single rack.

KMRUNOUT
 
risky biz said:
Well, it's certainly intriguing. I'm curious how many reading this agree with your interpretation.
Click to expand...

Who knows.

But the Golf/Pool debate has been done to death already not only here but also on many other forums including golf forums I frequent , and I've never seen a single poll on either forum base come out in favor of pool. In fact, not a single one of them have ever been particularly close.

For whatever thats worth.

Either way, I play both, Pool since I was 6 years old and golf started when I was around 8. I've been at competitive levels in both so I feel like I have an extremely strong basis for my opinion on the subject, not knee jerk reaction or bias for or against Earl.
 
KMRUNOUT said:
What makes you think so? I'd say the exact opposite. Earl says he's shot in the 60's many times. Tiger doesn't shoot in the 60's every time. But my guess is that Tiger has NEVER broke and ran a single rack.

KMRUNOUT
Click to expand...

Based in Earls attitude, bad temper and history of sportsmanship over his whole career....

Would anyone really believe any score he claims to have shot based on the honor system?

:eek:

Funny parallel, Trump claims to be scratch and has like a dozen club championships yet if you ask anyone who works at his courses they will tell you he typically shoots in the 80s. Yet no one dares question his score to him directly.
 
risky biz said:
That's only because races to 8, etc., don't reveal the best player. The current predominant structure of competition is flawed. That isn't the fault of the game, it's the fault of the competitive structure. Longer races will reveal the best player.
Click to expand...

You don't have professional golfers all playing 72 holes of mini-putt and winning tournaments at random and go "our problem here is that we need to make them play more holes!".

The playing surface needs to be tougher because rest assured we are not going to see races to 21 or longer in tournament play and a guy like Raj Hundal with his break is still a threat on a 4.5 inch pocket diamond even in a longer race while he was completely exposed on the 4 1/8th inch diamond of TAR.

Throw Raj onto a 4 1/8th inch cut diamond against SVB, Alex, Dennis and the rest of the top players in the world and see if he ever wins another major event.
 
what's funny?

RRfireblade said:
Based in Earls attitude, bad temper and history of sportsmanship over his whole career....

Would anyone really believe any score he claims to have shot based on the honor system?

:eek:

Funny parallel, Trump claims to be scratch and has like a dozen club championships yet if you ask anyone who works at his courses they will tell you he typically shoots in the 80s. Yet no one dares question his score to him directly.
Click to expand...

And.....? This will make you a believer.

http://www.sedgefieldcc.org/viewCustomPage.aspx?id=98

It's no dogtrack, believe me.

E mail or call for a list of past club champions, see for yourself. Johnny Archer, Kim Davenport, Corey, and numerous more pros know how he plays. Common knowledge around the tour.
 
jimmy-leggs said:
Earl telling Joe Rogan that pool is alot more difficult than golf...................................................................................................................................................................................................
OMFG
Click to expand...

Not for Earl...
 
champ2107 said:
i bet if i took pool seriously and practiced daily for a year i could place decently once in a while in a pro pool tourney and if i did the same for golf, i wouldn't even be the best amateur in my city.
Click to expand...

I don't think I could do the same. I think it is very difficult to reach the skill level of a pro pool player.
 
Originally Posted by risky biz
"That's only because races to 8, etc., don't reveal the best player. The current predominant structure of competition is flawed. That isn't the fault of the game, it's the fault of the competitive structure. Longer races will reveal the best player."

Celtic said:
You don't have professional golfers all playing 72 holes of mini-putt and winning tournaments at random and go "our problem here is that we need to make them play more holes!".

The playing surface needs to be tougher because rest assured we are not going to see races to 21 or longer in tournament play and a guy like Raj Hundal with his break is still a threat on a 4.5 inch pocket diamond even in a longer race while he was completely exposed on the 4 1/8th inch diamond of TAR.

Throw Raj onto a 4 1/8th inch cut diamond against SVB, Alex, Dennis and the rest of the top players in the world and see if he ever wins another major event.
Click to expand...

If there was any real logical basis to what you're saying why aren't you saying that the cup in golf is way too big? What's the size of a golf cup to a golf ball compared to the size of a Diamond or Tournament Brunswick pocket to an OB?

There is also no reason why there can't be longer races in pool tournaments. They just need to shrink the field for top level pro events by requiring long, off-camera, prefinal races at an inexpensive venue to qualify.

I don't have any opinions about Raj vs. anyone else. If one player is better than another it will show up in adequately long races. The fact of the matter is that the best pool players in the world can miss shots with 4.5" pockets, sometimes consecutively. I'm not anxious to see smaller pockets but not really opposed to them either. I've been thinking about playing more snooker, anyway.
 
KMRUNOUT said:
Earl says he's shot in the 60's many times. Tiger doesn't shoot in the 60's every time.
Click to expand...

On the course that Earl actually shot in the 60's and from the same tees? I suggest you don't bet against it... The PGA courses and the tees they play from are a TOTALLY different game then Earl is playing. If he tried a round on a US-Open course from the pro tees as they are set up for the actual event he would be REALLY lucky to break into the 80's.

From a book called Paper Tiger.

Consider the golf-greatness pyramid's base, a wide mass of good players, great players, best ball strikers you have ever witnessed firsthand, the only ace you have ever been accidentally, terrifyingly, matched up with--we'll call him or her The Best Player You Know. Maybe he's your club champion, maybe your neighbor's sixteen-year-old, perhaps it's your boss who has the scorecard from Pebble Beach on the wall and tells all the clients, "Shot 73, couldn't make a damn putt." The real sticks, guys who talk about what they might have done in golf if they steered their life a little differently, if only they took their shot. A two-, three-handicap--maybe even a scratch player. If you watched them hit balls you would weep inside.

And here's the news about The Best Players You Know: They're s***. Scratch is s***. The Best Players You Know simply cannot play. They are the mere masses, golf's faceless proletariat, utterly forgettable. They are little than the wide sprawling base of wannabes on which the pyramid is planted.

<snip>

When most people think of a great golfer, these are the few dozen names they think of--Tiger, Jack, Arnie, and the like. Most people don't consider the bulging pyramid of golf talent. They know nothing of how much good golf is really out there. The scratch players at your club--they are, by any statistical analysis, great golfers, top-tier, 1 percent players. And yet, the Club Pro and the Stud Amateur and the Attached Pro, they could dispatch The Best Player You Know using persimmon woods and a guttie. And none are quite as battle-hardened as the Mini-Tour Philanthropists who are already making hefty donations to the Grinders, and the Grinders don't even dream about the steady life of the Nationwide Earner, who would still ask a PGA Tour Survivor for their autograph. All of them would stand in line to shake hands with a PGA Tour Player. And as for the Superstars up in the stratosphere looking down on all of it? They should amend those ads on TV--These guys are good. How good? You've got no f*****g idea.
Click to expand...


Here is a "scratch" golfer's opinion from another forum on the subject.

I have played Scratch or thereabouts for about 20 years. Handicap in the +1 to -3 range. I used to live in South Carolina. I played Hilton Head a day after the tournament held there in the mid 1990's. It was still playing as the PGA pros played it. IT ATE MY LUNCH PGA players are at least 5 or 6 strokes a round better than a Scratch golfer. A Scratch amateur cant hold a candle to a PGA pro, heck half of them couldnt beat the beat the pro at their club, if the pro there plays just a little.
Click to expand...

And that is the opinion of every honest "scratch" golfer I have met and been lucky enough to play with. I suck at golf, pretty much live in the 90's, but I have played with guys who competed on the national level and who actually had negative handicaps at one time, the club pro at my course actually tried to go pro and his skill at the game boggles my mind, he tortures our local course from the tips averaging well into the 60's on the par 72 course. Ask him how close he was to actually being a PGA pro golfer though? Not even close, those courses, the guys at the top of the PGA, they are WAY beyond what virtually anyone realizes until they try to get there themselves.

http://www.golfwrx.com/forums/topic/302657-a-question-about-scratch-golfers/

This is actually a great read this thread, and it shows how nothing like golf pool really is. Top amature players in golf have no prayer against the true pros.
 
Last edited:
Celtic said:
This is actually a great read this thread, and it shows how nothing like golf pool really is. Top amature players in golf have no prayer against the true pros.
Click to expand...

The PGA Tour pro is light years better than a scratch golfer. It's not even close, even remotely.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top