THE LUCKIEST GOLFER

The Miami Herald ^ | Tue, Jul. 22, 2003

[presidio9]

With all due respect to PGA Tour golfer Ben Curtis, the title, ''Champion golfer of the year,'' seems an awkward fit. Mr. Curtis is an unknown rookie who walked away with the claret jug on Sunday in the British Open.

The Open, one of golf's four big tournaments -- or majors -- is intentionally designed as a grueling test. Playing conditions are awful -- it often is cold, blustery and wet. Fairways are pinched to the width of a traffic lane, the rough is knee-deep, and greens are as slick as a marble tabletop.

Usually, the Open identifies the golfer who is the best player, has control of his emotions and the patience of Job. Sunday's final round began with Mr. Curtis and some of the world's best players, including Tiger Woods, Vijay Singh, Thomas Borjn, David Love III and Sergio Garcia, bunched within two strokes of each other. By day's end, Mr. Curtis emerged victorious because he shot the day's best round, a 69. He also won because in the course of the week, he suffered fewer ''unlucky'' breaks. This happens when course conditions are so severe that excellent shots aren't always rewarded and bad shots get ''lucky'' bounces. Organizers should ponder if the 2003 Open put too high a premium on luck.

[timydnuc]

I have played the game since I was 7. I love it and I'm good at it. I had honorary Uncles named Demerit, Bolt, and a hillbilly by the name of Sneed, all friends of my father, a great amature. In the fifties they taught me a swing that would last a lifetime. I've gone from a 4 handicap to a 12, the swing can be horendious at times, but I love this game. Now I play to an honest 14 handicap, and the game means more than it ever did when I shot the light out. This is a game that makes you play against your self, and the course. It's all about your character, and your belief in your game. It's the most wonderful game you will ever play.

I get to play tomorrow with good friends that love this game as much as I. A good course, good friends, and a pretty day. What more could you ask. Play the game and enjoy!

[presidio9]

I have repeatedly asked this person not to ping me. In the past you have suspended him for disregarding my request. PLease ask him not to ping me in the future. Thanks.

[TomB]

Just to let you know who you are dealing with. Note his response when asked to stop pinging:

---

To: Joe Whitey

I will no longer reply to you, and I respectfully request you don't post to me.

I promise not to post to you as long as you promise to keep your stupidity to yourself. Otherwise, all bets are off. If you can't run with the big dogs... you know the rest. You have repeatedly called me a socialist, but I am an adult, and I can address the issue without sniffling. And because the truth is staring us all in the face anyway:

I am not a socialist for wanting order in society. You are an anarchist for not being willing to accept that order comes with a price.

133 posted on 04/02/2003 2:58 PM EST by presidio9

---

But that brings up an interesting point. I have noticed quite a few of these "don't ping me anymore" posts recently. It seems that when someone gets nailed saying something untrue, they use this to end the discussion. What exactly is the rule? Does this mean that the next time P9 says something stupid (checks watch), I cannot respond to it?

[presidio9]

Um, nobody's listening jackass.

[TomB]

This is worth pointing out to remind you of whom you are dealing with:

---

To: presidio9


Basically, you signed up an account in 2000 and never used it. Sometime after June of last year, you started posting with it. Then you signed up some other names, and started posting with them, occasionally to the same thread to make yourself sound like more than one person.

And this is something that has happened before, perhaps not with you, but with other people. Strangely, there have been dozens of screen names signed up around that same time back in 2000 that have exhibited the same pattern, and almost always the personalities exhibited in the postings have been troublesome. I am sure that is just a coincidence though.

What kind of person decides to spend years setting up multiple personalities to debate with on an internet forum is up to everyone else to determine.


120 posted on 05/19/2003 4:32 PM EDT by Admin Moderator


---

"What kind of person"? Undoubtedly a very trustworthy person.

[TomB]

Undoubtedly a very trustworthy person.

I forgot the < sarcasm > tag.

[TomB]

Um, nobody's listening jackass.

Truer words were never spoken.