[T.J. Sturges]

Dr. Katz...as much as Tommy thought the site needed my return, he will likely organize a ticker tape parade to salute your long awaited return to GCA.  Thanks for your always clever comments and your insightful words of wisdom.  You always made the site fun, and made us all aware that we shouldn't take ourselves too seriously.  I salute your return.

I am told Ran will return to cyber-access tomorrow.  It has been suggested to me by "The Committee" that, in the spirit of full and complete disclosure (tongue planted firmly in cheek), I attempt to summarize some of the excellent points made here by this knowledgable group of golf afficianados.

Summary:

1.  It has been determined that "Ran's game is failing."

2.  It has been suggested that "Ran is not much of a player."

3.  We have divulged that Ran is known to beg for strokes.

4.  Brad Miller even shared that Golf's Most Beloved Figure not only begs for strokes, but he shamelessly asserts his desire to choose (during the course of the match) which holes to use them on (Brad even described privately a debacle at the Eden hole at Yeamans Hall where Ran excercised his "tee declared stroke" only after Mr. Miller hit his approach in a bunker. Tragically it still resulted in Ran losing the hole, after Golf's Most Beloved Figure 4 putted from 18 feet).

5.  Finally, it was divulged by Golf's Most Beloved Electrician that he too had defeated REM III in a hotly contested match that went to extra holes.

Did I miss anything?

TS

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom Egan,

It's interesting that you, who hasn't contributed one iota to this site, financially or rhetorically, for the last two years, has chosen to be critical of my participation.

Since your absence didn't diminish the content or quality on this site, it's doubtful that your presence will have any impact.

[Tom_Egan]

Pat Mucci --

Imagine my surprise and embarrasment when I saw the post on this thread under my name submitted, I suppose, by Dr. Katz.  How he got my user name, etc., enabling him to do this is a mystery, but my attorneys are investigating.  I suppose the fact that he signed his own name to the post indicates that he had no wish to be anonymous.  Why he chose me as his "channeler" is puzzling.

As one who has had many mean-spirited messages posted under his name, you surely understand how upsetting this is.  I hope you'll be, as always, gracious in this matter and realize that any animus you have should be directed at Dr. Katz and not to me.  I am, in fact, the real aggrieved party.

I agree with most of Dr. Katz's points but will reserve judgement on those that mentioned you.

Thanks again for caring, Pat.  

Tom

[T.J. Sturges]

Upon further review:  

1.  I wish everyone would maintain their collective sense of humor(s).  I'm picking on my good friend Ran here, and mean no harm by the ribbing (I hope Dr. K and PM have the same intentions).

2.  Don't take yourselves so seriously.  Life is full of humor...look for it...celebrate it...life is too hard otherwise.

3.  In the interest of editorial fairness, I must confess (at the urging of "The Committee") that I witnessed Golf's Most Beloved Figure shoot his finest round in golf (ever).  A near flawless round at the wonderful Yeamans Hall Club, where Ran produced an authentic UNDER PAR ROUND.  I'll never forget it as I watched (in horror) as his 2 iron struck the flagstick from 210 on # 7, I shot a solid 77 (from the back tees) and never won a hole in our match, and Golf's Most Beloved Figure carded a very tidy 69.  This actually happened.

4.  As much as I enjoy piling on his Ran-ness, he can play when he get's his S#@* together.

Please resume your normal programming.

TS

[brad_miller]

TS, guess Ran got to you. But in all fairness I have seen him with game also. The best round I have ever played with him was out at Riveria when he went around in a smooth 75 or so from the back tees. We had a close match but I lost this one shouting something in the upper 70's. Back then (early 2000's) there was no begging for strokes or thoughts that golf was better with hickories. Of course during this round our host a famous UCLA'er kicked both our butts.

Ted, just so you know, I do remember a thread were Ran recapped all his victories with no mention of his many losses to the same people. Ran just might be able to pull that one up again.  

While GMBF may be in a slump with the sticks, he is still one of a handful in the world that uses the pen best to comment on GCA.

[T.J. Sturges]

Brad,

I do recall a post where he was describing "crushing" just about everyone in the Northern Hemisphere.  I'm just wondering why we've no response from S. Pines on this thread (perhaps he is out "crushing" the ghost of Payne Stewart on No. 2).

TS

[ward peyronnin]

Ted

The account to which you refer is in Ran's interview.

WardP

[Tom_Doak]

Should I drag the poor man to the back tees at Sebonack, or allow him to play from a more sensible place?

What is the over/under line?

[Tom_Doak]

Dr. Katz:

Thank you for your observations on the USGA's attitudes toward preserving their "war chest".  They started raising the money in order to fight the battle, now they seem more interested in preserving their capital.

A friend of mine suggested that if they want to take a stand, the first thing they should do is give away all that money to charitable efforts promoting golf, so there is no "war chest" for the manufacturers to gain in a lawsuit.

However, I have recently been informed of a plan to turn the ship around without throwing everybody overboard.  It sounds reasonable enough that it just might work.  If we haven't seen the first of several positive steps by this time next year, count me in on the revolution.

[T.J. Sturges]

Tom,

RE:  Ran vs. Sebonack (back tees)

Over and under(s):

Modern Equipment-   96 (I'll take the over)

Hickories-  96 (he is a true renaissance man-he shoots about the same score with any equipment...I'll take the under)

TS

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom Doak,

I don't think that Ran would enjoy the experience from the Black tees.

Those tees are well beyond his ability and would make the day a laborious one at best.

I think Ran would enjoy the Blue tees.

I think there are elements of "sportiness" and "championship" play to be found in the Blue Tees.

There's very little "sportiiness"  in the Black tees.
The golf course is far too demanding for an individual who begged and pleaded for 12 shots from me just one short year ago.

Let him enjoy the sights, the golf course, the day and his golf.
Play tees commensurate with his ability, not tees light years beyond his ability.

By doing so, he'll focus more on what's around him, rather than being consumed by struggling to make pars and bogies, which will happen if the golf course is presented from the Black tees.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Those tees are well beyond his ability and would make the day a laborious one at best.

Pat,
Yes, as a witness and just as inept participant to the ugliness that went on in the desert, playing from the Red tees might be the best option.

If Ran shot a 73 @ Riviera, I'm a Tuskegee Airman. If Ran shot a 69 @ Yeamans Hall, well then I'm a NASA Astronaut too.

[brad_miller]

Tommy, you took the words right out of my mouth. Ran seems at his best with about 5800 yards.

Relating to YH and Riveria, put your flight suit on! Hard to believe given where his game is today. But then again he is about to become a real estate mogal.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tommy and Brad,

Sebonack gets exponentially more difficult from the Black tees versus the Blue tees.

A perfect hole to disect is # 17.

From the Blue's it's challenging but playable.
From the Black's it is very difficult and errant shots will pay a terrible price, especially if the pin is cut to the far right

From the Blue's you could play it everyday and have fun.
From the Black's you wouldn't want to play it more than once or twice a year, under ideal conditions, with benign pins.

[T.J. Sturges]

...Tommy in an astronaut suit...

It's going to take some time for me to recover from that visual.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()