The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX


Go Back   Rolex Forums - Rolex Forum > General Topics > Open Discussion Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 13 April 2013, 06:18 AM   #1
daunwaun
"TRF" Member
 
daunwaun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Real Name: Ken
Location: toronto
Watch: 18K YG Day Date
Posts: 2,985
The Masters 2013 Official Thread

I love golf, its still really crappy weather here in Ontario Canada but this weekend helps me get through it - The Masters.

Who's your pick to take the green jacket this year?

Is there a better major in your opinion?

My money's on Tiger!

P.S. How about that 14 year old...yikes!

__________________
DAUNWAUN
daunwaun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13 April 2013, 07:21 AM   #2
advocatia
Banned
 
advocatia's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Real Name: Andy
Location: Florida USA
Watch: PAM 422 GMTIIC
Posts: 868
Augusta National has a well documented history of racial and gender discrimination, obnoxious elitism, nauseating control over how their tournament is broadcast (Gary McCord) and I despise everything that club represents. That said, they put on one helluva show. I'll be watching. Tiger is unstoppable at or near the lead. Safe money.
advocatia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13 April 2013, 07:36 AM   #3
77T
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
77T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Real Name: PaulG
Location: Georgia
Posts: 42,024
Quote:
Originally Posted by daunwaun View Post

P.S. How about that 14 year old...yikes!

He played great - but Guan was assessed a one-stroke penalty after the 17th hole of his second round for slow play. He's at +4 and may not make the cut. He's on the bubble now and if Tiger drops to -6 or -7 then he misses the cut.
__________________


Does anyone really know what time it is?
77T is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 13 April 2013, 07:42 AM   #4
crew
"TRF" Member
 
crew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Real Name: John
Location: Rochester/Naples
Watch: Pepsi
Posts: 18,307
I heard someone on sports radio refer to The Masters as the "greatest HD event on TV".
I thought that was well said.
If the British can call their open just "The Open" (this is not a criticism), I think we could simply call The Masters "The Tournament".
crew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13 April 2013, 11:04 AM   #5
daunwaun
"TRF" Member
 
daunwaun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Real Name: Ken
Location: toronto
Watch: 18K YG Day Date
Posts: 2,985
Quote:
Originally Posted by crew View Post
I heard someone on sports radio refer to The Masters as the "greatest HD event on TV".
I thought that was well said.
If the British can call their open just "The Open" (this is not a criticism), I think we could simply call The Masters "The Tournament".
I would agree, its simply a spectacle.
__________________
DAUNWAUN
daunwaun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13 April 2013, 01:11 PM   #6
Boardman
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Real Name: Jay
Location: Houston
Watch: Rolex, Omega, IWC
Posts: 321
It's anyone's still to win. Watching Dustin falter today was painful. Not as bad as rory last year though. Coupes is awesome but likely to fall again. Tiger...,eh....still can't stand him. Could it be Jason days time to shine??

Ain't it fun!

I hungry suddenly for a $1.50 pimento cheese sandwich.
Boardman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13 April 2013, 01:31 PM   #7
Watchdog
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Real Name: Junkyard Dog
Location: The Doghouse
Watch: I can't tell time
Posts: 6,822
Tiger was very unlucky today when it hit and ricocheted into the water.
Watchdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13 April 2013, 01:32 PM   #8
TswaneNguni
"TRF" Member
 
TswaneNguni's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Real Name: Chris
Location: .
Watch: Daytonas/Subs/GMTs
Posts: 12,609
If any of the South Africans take it, it will be ... !!!!!!
Looks like Schwartzel and Immelman still in with a chance.

Mister Guan .... 14 years old ...absolutely amazing !!
TswaneNguni is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13 April 2013, 01:48 PM   #9
AzPaul
2024 ROLEX SUBMARINER 41 Pledge Member
 
AzPaul's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Real Name: Paul
Location: Tucson, Az
Watch: Rolex 1501
Posts: 13,904
Get a feeling that shot off the flag stick was only delaying the inevitable.
__________________
Ain't much of a crime, whacking a surly bartender
AzPaul is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13 April 2013, 07:42 PM   #10
77T
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
77T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Real Name: PaulG
Location: Georgia
Posts: 42,024
I'm excited to follow these 2 pairings today. Tiger may kick it up a notch, but the back 9 has not been kind recently...
Attached Images
File Type: jpg masters.jpg (30.0 KB, 129 views)
__________________


Does anyone really know what time it is?
77T is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 13 April 2013, 08:52 PM   #11
eman1200
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: charlotte
Posts: 730
C'mon Freddie!!
eman1200 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13 April 2013, 09:13 PM   #12
HL65
TRF Moderator & 2024 SubLV41 Patron
 
HL65's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Real Name: Ken
Location: SW Florida
Watch: One on my wrist.
Posts: 64,011
Would love to see Fred C win it!!
__________________

SPEM SUCCESSUS ALIT
HL65 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13 April 2013, 10:02 PM   #13
crew
"TRF" Member
 
crew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Real Name: John
Location: Rochester/Naples
Watch: Pepsi
Posts: 18,307
Quote:
Originally Posted by eman1200 View Post
C'mon Freddie!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteelerFan65 View Post
Would love to see Fred C win it!!
I'm with you!
I saw Fred being interviewed last night & they asked him what he would do if he won. He replied that he would immediately retire from golf as a 2nd Masters would mean so much. He said he'd come back every year to play in the Masters but probably play in no others.
This guy is cool.
crew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13 April 2013, 11:35 PM   #14
mtrunner
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
mtrunner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Real Name: Gary
Location: Bozeman, MT
Watch: 126508 Paul Newman
Posts: 7,835
Tiger Woods was nearly disqualified for an improper ball drop. Sports center just said he is getting a 2 shot penalty. Now is is 5 shots off the lead. Should be an interesting day.
mtrunner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13 April 2013, 11:41 PM   #15
77T
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
77T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Real Name: PaulG
Location: Georgia
Posts: 42,024
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtrunner View Post
Tiger Woods was nearly disqualified for an improper ball drop. Sports center just said he is getting a 2 shot penalty. Now is is 5 shots off the lead. Should be an interesting day.
Yes, a very lucky penalty indeed; they used the 33-7 rule ("HDTV" clause) . The other option was DQ. Based on my understanding he should have been DQ'd.
__________________


Does anyone really know what time it is?

Last edited by 77T; 13 April 2013 at 11:49 PM.. Reason: added rule#
77T is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 14 April 2013, 12:02 AM   #16
77T
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
77T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Real Name: PaulG
Location: Georgia
Posts: 42,024
BTW, Faldo and Chamblee are on Golf Channel begging Tiger to DQ himself for the mistaken interpretation of Rule 26-1 governing his drop.
__________________


Does anyone really know what time it is?
77T is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 14 April 2013, 12:06 AM   #17
mtrunner
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
mtrunner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Real Name: Gary
Location: Bozeman, MT
Watch: 126508 Paul Newman
Posts: 7,835
Quote:
Originally Posted by 77T View Post
BTW, Faldo and Chamblee are on Golf Channel begging Tiger to DQ himself for the mistaken interpretation of Rule 26-1 governing his drop.
I think the 2 shot penalty is fair but everyone is going to have their own opinions and this will probably debated to death especially if he puts himself into connection again.
mtrunner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 April 2013, 12:19 AM   #18
77T
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
77T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Real Name: PaulG
Location: Georgia
Posts: 42,024
Agree - it was not a flagrant rules violation. Had he realized the error by the 16th tee I believe he would have told an official and taken the 2 strokes.

For what it's worth the vast audience would rather see him take a penalty and strive to overcome it.

I'm pulling for Guan to overcome his slow play penalty stroke and put together 2 good rounds to win the low amateur title and cup.
__________________


Does anyone really know what time it is?
77T is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 14 April 2013, 12:42 AM   #19
lhanddds
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: USA
Watch: of course
Posts: 8,429
Pulling for Fred


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
lhanddds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 April 2013, 01:58 AM   #20
AzPaul
2024 ROLEX SUBMARINER 41 Pledge Member
 
AzPaul's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Real Name: Paul
Location: Tucson, Az
Watch: Rolex 1501
Posts: 13,904
In Augusta's explanation, they're basically saying that Tiger's not being disqualified for signing a wrong scorecard because they had concluded he was not in violation of 26-1 prior to the completion of his round. Whether this is true or not, only the guys in the green jackets know for sure but if it is true, then not disqualifying him now is the right call. If they had actually reviewed the drop prior to the completion of his round, had the opportunity to inform him of the penalty (before he signed his scorecard) but decided it wasn't a violation, then it's really all on them. After all, the DQ penalty would be for signing an improprer card, not the drop itself and at the time he signed the card, the legitamcy of the drop had supposedly been reviewed and cleared.
__________________
Ain't much of a crime, whacking a surly bartender
AzPaul is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 April 2013, 03:55 AM   #21
77T
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
77T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Real Name: PaulG
Location: Georgia
Posts: 42,024
Quote:
Originally Posted by AzPaul View Post
After all, the DQ penalty would be for signing an improprer card, not the drop itself and at the time he signed the card, the legitamcy of the drop had supposedly been reviewed and cleared.
Yes, there was just a press conference and Ridley, the Rules Chmn., said as much.

The Masters has many traditions that are different from other PGA Majors, and one of them is this: there are no "walking officials" to help a player get a rules interpretation on the spot.

The "2 yds" Tiger stepped back before his drop was his own mistake - my generous assessment is a misunderstanding of Rule 26. But he would've benefited from an official's interpretation right then.
__________________


Does anyone really know what time it is?
77T is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 14 April 2013, 04:31 AM   #22
TheVTCGuy
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Real Name: Paul
Location: San Diego
Watch: 126619LB
Posts: 21,540
Quote:
Originally Posted by 77T View Post
Yes, there was just a press conference and Ridley, the Rules Chmn., said as much.

The Masters has many traditions that are different from other PGA Majors, and one of them is this: there are no "walking officials" to help a player get a rules interpretation on the spot.

The "2 yds" Tiger stepped back before his drop was his own mistake - my generous assessment is a misunderstanding of Rule 26. But he would've benefited from an official's interpretation right then.

Ok, been following this all morning and all of you are much smarter (and better) about the game of golf then me, and I do agree the penalty was appropriate, and he should not have been DQ'd. BUT - Here is my question:

From what I understand (Someone please correct me if I'm wrong) The way this whole thing started was in the post round interview Tiger said: (Something like) "I moved back two yards on the drop to get a better shot" That caused the committee to review the video and THEN institute the 2-stroke penalty. As a matter of fact, in the interview the rule manager said that at the time of the drop, they felt it was within the rules and no penalty was instituted.

IS THIS TRUE? The committee hears the player say something in the post-round interview and decides to take a second look and THEN institute a penalty!?!?!? Is this fair?!!!? Not in my opinion... At the time of the drop, they ADMITTED they believed it was a fair drop, can they reverse that decision based on what a player says?
TheVTCGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 April 2013, 04:52 AM   #23
mtrunner
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
mtrunner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Real Name: Gary
Location: Bozeman, MT
Watch: 126508 Paul Newman
Posts: 7,835
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy View Post
Ok, been following this all morning and all of you are much smarter (and better) about the game of golf then me, and I do agree the penalty was appropriate, and he should not have been DQ'd. BUT - Here is my question:

From what I understand (Someone please correct me if I'm wrong) The way this whole thing started was in the post round interview Tiger said: (Something like) "I moved back two yards on the drop to get a better shot" That caused the committee to review the video and THEN institute the 2-stroke penalty. As a matter of fact, in the interview the rule manager said that at the time of the drop, they felt it was within the rules and no penalty was instituted.

IS THIS TRUE? The committee hears the player say something in the post-round interview and decides to take a second look and THEN institute a penalty!?!?!? Is this fair?!!!? Not in my opinion... At the time of the drop, they ADMITTED they believed it was a fair drop, can they reverse that decision based on what a player says?
This is the explanation from Yahoo news:

It starts with Tiger's approach shot on 15 hitting the flag and bouncing back into the water. From there, Tiger had three options: drop a ball in the designated drop area, go back to the original spot where he hit or put the ball in direct line with where it entered the water.

He did none of those precisely, going a couple of yards back from the original spot but at a slightly different angle. A television viewer alerted the tournament about the discrepancy. An initial video review of the shot by officials, however, determined no violation.

"At that moment and based on that evidence, the Committee determined he had complied with the rules," the tournament stated.

Woods eventually finished his round and signed his scorecard. In subsequent media interviews, however, Tiger explained that he purposefully took his drop "two yards further back" from the original shot.

That acknowledgement, the tournament said, changed the decision-making process.

"After he signed his scorecard, and in a television interview subsequent to the round, the player stated that he had played further from the point than where he had played his third shot. Such action would constitute playing from the wrong place.

"The subsequent information provided by the player's interview after he had competed play warranted further review and discussion with him [Saturday] morning.

"After meeting with the player, it was determined that he had violated Rule 26, and was assessed a two-stroke penalty."
mtrunner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 April 2013, 04:59 AM   #24
signcarver
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Real Name: Steve
Location: New Jersey
Watch: 116610LN
Posts: 127
Although i realize the are two unrelated events i am disappointed that Tiger did not disqualify himself and the they assessed Guan a penalty for slow play.

Both may be justified but both still stink.

This is the one tournament i watch every year but i'm really disappointed by the way both of these events were handled.
signcarver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 April 2013, 05:06 AM   #25
advocatia
Banned
 
advocatia's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Real Name: Andy
Location: Florida USA
Watch: PAM 422 GMTIIC
Posts: 868
I am most bothered by television viewers impacting the results. is that not the job of the on-site officials?
advocatia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 April 2013, 05:09 AM   #26
mtrunner
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
mtrunner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Real Name: Gary
Location: Bozeman, MT
Watch: 126508 Paul Newman
Posts: 7,835
Why does everyone think Tiger should have disqualified himself? The only reason he was even called out was by a viewer calling in. The rule was put in to specifically protect players that are always under the microscope since they are on TV more often than other players. The committee made their decision he did nothing wrong and he signed the scorecard. Tiger thought he was proceeding correctly under the rule when he made the statement on TV after the round.
mtrunner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 April 2013, 05:13 AM   #27
TheVTCGuy
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Real Name: Paul
Location: San Diego
Watch: 126619LB
Posts: 21,540
Quote:
Originally Posted by advocatia View Post
I am most bothered by television viewers impacting the results. is that not the job of the on-site officials?

EXACTLY! And MT Runner, thanks for the explanation. This is my whole point, they listen to a television viewer, look at it, and decide there is no violation. THEN, they listen to a post-round interview where Tiger says " two yards back... " whatever. So they THEN decide to institute a penalty? In other words, if Tiger had NOT done the interview there would have been NO PENALTY!?

I think two strokes was fair, and I understand people bringing up the point he should withdraw or perhaps should have been DQ'd, don't agree, but you definitely have excellent points. What I am saying, is the committee looked at the event, immediately following it (after a TV viewer called in, give me a break) and made the decision it was legal. THAT SHOULD BE IT. How much latitude do they have? Three months from now, when a TV viewer is watching the DVR of the event and calls in, will they decide the winner should have had a penalty and change the results?
TheVTCGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 April 2013, 05:46 AM   #28
77T
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
77T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Real Name: PaulG
Location: Georgia
Posts: 42,024
Tiger could not DQ himself once the Rules Committee assessed the penalty. He was judged as commiting an infraction that did not require a DQ.

The only option open was to WD this AM. But that in itself is only open due to injury - else he would be open to additional penalties for quitting a PGA Tourney in progress.
__________________


Does anyone really know what time it is?
77T is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 14 April 2013, 05:50 AM   #29
77T
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
77T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Real Name: PaulG
Location: Georgia
Posts: 42,024
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy View Post
EXACTLY! And MT Runner, thanks for the explanation. This is my whole point, they listen to a television viewer, look at it, and decide there is no violation. THEN, they listen to a post-round interview where Tiger says " two yards back... " whatever. So they THEN decide to institute a penalty? In other words, if Tiger had NOT done the interview there would have been NO PENALTY!?

I think two strokes was fair, and I understand people bringing up the point he should withdraw or perhaps should have been DQ'd, don't agree, but you definitely have excellent points. What I am saying, is the committee looked at the event, immediately following it (after a TV viewer called in, give me a break) and made the decision it was legal. THAT SHOULD BE IT. How much latitude do they have? Three months from now, when a TV viewer is watching the DVR of the event and calls in, will they decide the winner should have had a penalty and change the results?
I think 99% of the public would agree that this should close the case. And about 95% of golfers who know the rules would too.

But the new rule has not been used until today and there are diverse opinions on that one.
__________________


Does anyone really know what time it is?
77T is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 14 April 2013, 06:04 AM   #30
AzPaul
2024 ROLEX SUBMARINER 41 Pledge Member
 
AzPaul's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Real Name: Paul
Location: Tucson, Az
Watch: Rolex 1501
Posts: 13,904
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy View Post
From what I understand (Someone please correct me if I'm wrong) The way this whole thing started was in the post round interview Tiger said: (Something like) "I moved back two yards on the drop to get a better shot" That caused the committee to review the video and THEN institute the 2-stroke penalty. As a matter of fact, in the interview the rule manager said that at the time of the drop, they felt it was within the rules and no penalty was instituted.

IS THIS TRUE? The committee hears the player say something in the post-round interview and decides to take a second look and THEN institute a penalty!?!?!? Is this fair?!!!? Not in my opinion... At the time of the drop, they ADMITTED they believed it was a fair drop, can they reverse that decision based on what a player says?
I believe when the rules committee reviewed the drop initially, they judged the distance between the new drop and his original shot as being both inadvertent and inconsequential, and therefore, unworthy of a penalty. It wasn't till after they heard Tiger say in his interview that he had knowingly dropped the ball a few feet back, (not inadvertently) that they decided a penalty was in order. As it turned out, it was Tiger's candor that cost him the strokes, not any competitive advantage the location of the drop itself might have given him.
__________________
Ain't much of a crime, whacking a surly bartender
AzPaul is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

OCWatches

Wrist Aficionado

My Watch LLC

WatchesOff5th

DavidSW Watches

Takuya Watches


*Banners Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.





Copyright ©2004-2024, The Rolex Forums. All Rights Reserved.

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Rolex is a registered trademark of ROLEX USA. The Rolex Forums is not affiliated with ROLEX USA in any way.