[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

Someone recently informed me that they thought that someone else had recently misquoted me.

On a previous post I had stated that the PRIMARY OBJECT of the GAME of golf was to get the ball from the tee (point A) into the hole (point B) in the fewest strokes possible.

It is that pursuit, that journey, that challenge, which creates the interest, competition, comraderie, agony, ecstacy, trials tribulations, joy, sorrow, drama and comedy that we find so appealing.

Without that contest, golf is no different than a good walk, or hike in the wilderness.

It is the intrinsic value of the pursuit/challenge of getting the ball from point A to Point B in the fewest possible strokes that creates all of the secondary values.

What type of character and integrity would an individual possess if they deliberately misquoted me ?

What is the primary OBJECT of the GAME of golf ?

P.S.
For those who don't have friends BEFORE they tee off,
I suggest that they buy a dog.

[Tim_Weiman]

Pat Mucci:

I'm not able to focus on such things as getting from point A to B in the fewest possible strokes.

To me, the object of the game of golf has something to do with mental health. There is something about playing the game that just makes me happier. And, while playing poorly isn't much fun, I don't have to be playing my very best to reach the pleasant state golf can put me in.

This started when I was about two years old and isn't likely to change.

Sorry if this isn't the kind of answer you are looking for.

[DMoriarty]

On a previous post I had stated that the PRIMARY OBJECT of the GAME of golf was to get the ball from the tee (point A) into the hole (point B) in the fewest strokes possible.

Sort of a modern notion, don't you think?  Often the primary objective for me is to get the ball from the tee to the hole in fewer strokes than my opponent.  Or would that be the primary object of a golf MATCH?  

What type of character and integrity would an individual possess if they deliberately misquoted me ?

What a strange tone to take.  I cant tell if you are kidding or not.  I know, you only question the character if they deliberately misquoted you, but wouldn't the gentlemenly  approach be to assume that the misquotation was inadvertant, and simply set the record straight?  I only ask because it (the object of the game)  is an interesting topic, but I don't really feel like getting involved in a vitriolic "discussion."

[Michael Moore]

Mr. Mucci -

Your first petty inquiry is beneath discussion.

To me, the object of the game is to mash the ball off the sweet spot of the club and to hear the concomitant sound.

If you are aimed a few degrees off target, so be it.

[TEPaul]

Pat asked:

"What is the primary OBJECT of the GAME of golf ?

and,

"What type of character and integrity would an individual possess if they deliberately misquoted me?"


The primary OBJECT of the GAME of golf is to create as many man-made rules and unnatural and formulaic limtations as possible (such as Pat Mucci continuously attempts to do).

HOWEVER, the primary OBJECT of the SPORT of golf is to;

"to get the ball from the tee (point A) into the hole (point B) in the fewest strokes possible."
quoted by Pat Mucci

THEREFORE, the type of character and integrity one would need to deliberately misquote Pat Mucci would be that of the true altruist, such as myself, with the integrity of the selfless teacher, such as myself, who's always dedicated to educating those, such as Pat Mucci, less informed than oneself.

[A_Clay_Man]

As a sport Pat is right, fewest strokes possible. But golf is more than the simple act of getting the ball in the hole, it's a character meter.

So, the same person who would deliberatly mis-quote is of the same character of the person who calls out a 5 when 6 was even questionable.

To share my pain, I must say that the character that exemplifies section #1 of the rule book is becoming fewer and farther inbetween since my relocation.

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

Tim Weiman,

Playing your best and playing poorly are merely self evaluations of your ability to get the ball from Point A to Point B.
Without that journey/pursuit/challenge one might as well stay on the practice tee or take a hike.  It is that journey/pursuit/challenge of getting the ball from Point A to Point B that creates everything else, including your mental health.  

To take away point B, takes away the essence of the game, and you would then, like TEPaul, wander aimlessly through fields, talking with the cows and other farm animals who have made the mistake of stopping to listen to him, while he waxes on, poetic, about the loss of the maintainance meld, all the time continuing his and your search for Point B.

For without Point B, there is no GAME.

DMoriarty,

Do you think that there was NO goal in the formative stages/early years of golf, that people just hit objects with no objective in mind ?

Or, like "name that tune" do you think someone said, " I can get this object from that point over here, to that point over there, in fewer shots than you can, or in a specific number ? "

Michael Moore,

It would seem like the driving range would be your milieu.

TEPaul,

You're back !  I was worried about you.  I had heard rumors that you had had a vision, a revelation that you finally realized that you were the one who was wrong 98 % of the time, and the reality of this discovery so disturbed you that you abandoned golf and took up lawn bowling, where you hoped to convince lawn bowlers of the importance of the maintainance meld.

I called Ran and many others asking if they had heard from you, or anything about you, because I felt it was my fault that you had abandoned golf and GCA, because I was the one who said that you were viewing things in reverse, and that you were wrong 98 % of the time.  I'm sorry, forgive me.

I want you to know that I was wrong, yes wrong.
You're not wrong 98 % of the time, and don't let anyone tell you any differently.  Not friends, family, acquaintances, golfers or GCA'ers, noone, because it's untrue.
You are only wrong 97% of the time.
And that's an important distinction for you to cling to.
Perhaps, if you listen more, you'll be able to make progress, possibly with the help of Dr Katz, and get that percentage down to 96 %, but that will take a great deal of committment, self examination, creative thinking and work on your part.

I'm glad you're back.

Remember, agreeing with me will drop that 97 % wrong ratio
dramatically.

A Clayman,

One's character only reveals itself when it is put to the test and STRESSED by the journey/pursuit/challenge of getting the ball from Point A to Point B in the fewest strokes possible.

[Steve Lang]

Pat Mucci,
Aren't you deep down really pursuing the purpose of golf, man or woman attempting to control their destiny?  The original Scottish object being the most entertaining ritual to pass time outdoors and get intoxicated by the spirit or spirits?  

After all, some objects will always remain unknown..

[Joe Hancock]

I love to discuss what golf is or isn't to me, but I want to know more about this abject horror of being misquoted.

Joe

[Norbert P]

Someone recently informed me that they thought that someone else had recently misquoted me.

Without a contest, golf is no different than a good walk down Hollywood and Vine lookin' for hot, desperate washed-up actresses sellin' their goods and services to the highest, well, any bidder with a heater in their car.

What type of character and integrity would an individual possess if they deliberately misquoted me ?

Junior, that's a good question.

The OBJECTive of golf is to find the SUBJECTives to ponder and question.  

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

Joe Hancock,

Spare yourself, it's too gruesome to describe.  

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

Redanman,

What good doth it do a man, if he should gain the whole world, but three putt the 18th green ?

When's the last time you walked off the golf course thrilled with your endeavor, having just three putted the 18th green ?

[TEPaul]

".....but I want to know more about this abject horror of being misquoted."

Joe Hancock:

Are you sure you want to know why Pat Mucci has an abject horror of being misquoted? I doubt you do if you're interested in sleeping well. It isn't pretty, I guarantee that. Dr. Katz is the only one on this website who needs to hear things like that.

It all goes back to the time little 6 year old Patty Mucci had his short pants and underpants stolen from him in the middle of New York City by a group of little hoodlums and the mental crisis that ensued when the story little Patty told his mother was denied and set straight by an onlooker.  

Dr. Katz might call this type of abject horror of being misquoted the "adolescent underpants robbery syndrome combined with and exaccerbated by the subsequently lying to your mother syndrome".

[Tom_Egan]

Pat --

Good post.  I agree completely on the subject of the Primary Object of the game of golf.  Point A to Point B indeed.

On the subject of accurate quotations vs. mis-quotations, however, the issue is a little more muddled.  If I were in your place I would resent the substance of my positions being mis-quoted, just as you do.  I would equally resent, though, accurate quotations of my sniping and vitriol which often detract from some great points you make.

That's just my opinion, though.  I could be wrong.

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

Tom Egan,

Could you cite me some recent examples of the latter ?

[Michael Moore]

Mr. Mucci -

How right you are. I do love the practice range, so much so that my chipping and putting suffer and my hands bleed. I was there for two hours last night.

The pace of play at the practice range can't be beat, and the price is right.

drivingrangeatlas.com??

Apologies for the harsh tone, I came home in a rambunctious mood after carousing with the youngsters on my soccer team.

[TEPaul]

Michael Moore said:

"Apologies for the harsh tone, I came home in a rambunctious mood after carousing with the youngsters on my soccer team."

Michael:

Golly Miss Molly, your post was at 10:23 am! You fellows up in Maine have to stop carousing in the morning. Can't you at least wait until the evening like the rest of us? And now you have the little kids on the soccer team doing it too? I realize Downeasterners like to hang on bar rails and have a good time but that's ridiculous. What are you trying to do, emulate our brothers to the north of you?

[Mike Benham]

Someone recently informed me that they thought that someone else had recently misquoted me.

Pat,

Did you have proof that you were misquoted?  I'm surprised that you are relying on someone thinking that "someone else" misquoted you ...

I can almsot hear the "objection, heresay, your honor, sustained" in the courtroom right now ...  

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

Michael Moore,

I too, love to practice.  I found it relaxing, but lately, it's become hard work.

Several people have told me that they hit it so well on the practice tee, but terribly on the golf course.  I've always felt that it was the fact that there were no adverse consequences for a mis-hit ball on the practice tee, you didn't have to play the bad shot, you just teed up another ball, with a good lie, and hit to your hearts content.
There seems to be no performance anxiety on the practice range.

[Paul_Turner]

Blimey, I'm glad Bernard Darwin didn't have such a view of the game.

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

Mike Benham,

Yes.

Paul Turner,

What did Bernard Darwin think was the primary objective of the game/sport of golf ?

[DMoriarty]

DMoriarty,

Do you think that there was NO goal in the formative stages/early years of golf, that people just hit objects with no objective in mind ?

Or, like "name that tune" do you think someone said, " I can get this object from that point over here, to that point over there, in fewer shots than you can, or in a specific number ? "

Patrick.  
Isn't the part I highlighted just what I said?  I was merely drawing the distinction between playing for an absolute low score and playing to beat an opponent in a match.  As anyone who has ever lagged a four foot birdie putt in a match will tell you, the object in match play can be and is very different than playing for score.  

[Paul_Turner]

Patrick Mucci

Going by his writing, a whole glut of reasons/objectives, and certainly not dominated by the "card and pencil" scoring mentality that the purely competitive golfer is obsessed with.

If he did have that mentality, it would certainly have made for less intertesting writing.

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

DMoriarty,

All too often, in match play, golfers make the mistake of playing their competitor instead of the hole.  And then, the competitor makes a superior shot, a great recovery or holes a long putt, and the strategy of playing your opponent, not the hole, goes down the toilet as he loses the hole.

In match play, while you have an opponent, you still have to play the golf course, and the object remains, getting the ball into the hole in the fewest strokes possible.

Paul Turner,

I must confess that I don't know what the "card and pencil scoring mentality" is.  It sounds like a nice catch phrase, but what does it mean ?

Is it wrong to want to go from point A to Point B in the fewest strokes possible ?  

Is golf primarily about something other than going from Point A to Point B in the fewest strokes possible in a sequence of pre-arranged Points A and B ?

I also don't know what a "purely competitive golfer" is.
Perhaps you could elaborate or define them.

[Paul_Turner]

Card and pencil mentality is expressed by players whose golf is dominated by score, and getting from A to B in the least strokes possible.  Very (or purely-like many PGA pros) competitive golfers relish this type of golf.

I play golf for lots of reasons, often with some, but not a lot of care for my score.  Sometimes it's simply for a good walk in the country.  

I'm only very bothered in my score in competitions; in the UK we only mark and hand in a card for competitions.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()