Of course most know that golf requires leaving the fairway and eventually achieving a target roughly the size of a softball. Not to mention that it is required every time, eighteen times in a row, rather than 30% of the time four or five times per game. Again, landing a baseball anywhere in a three acre lot can produce the coveted prize.
x2
The Maris family? More importantly, McGwire owes an apology to Sammy Sosa, the "true" Home Run King of '98...
Guys if taking steroids is conceder cheating then taking meds to live longer or taking Viagra for sex is cheating, the new medicine is to enhance your life.. Right now I know that all major athlete are on HGH cause they’re not testing for that right now and in 10yrs they’re be a new drug on the market, that’s the way it is.
Spoken like a true novice
so true but that's why we watch it enjoy all the drama that comes with it " Its call entertainment with a lot of bullshit "
:laugh:
We can agree on the long discourse (a lot of people just don't get itNot as novice as you might think but that is neither here nor there. I thought the primary discussion was about hitting and so I'll stand by what I said. If you want to talk about all the other aspects of the sport then be prepared for a very long discourse. I'll start with you have unlimited times to get the ball into the cup. You may suck at golf but eventually you'll do it. Not so with baseball.
Spoken like a true novice
). The time statement is irrelevant because we are talking about being successful, if you don't play golf in a set period of time you will never be successful. The statement about sucking but eventually doing it is also a bad comparison, you "could" suck at hitting a baseball and with enough attempts you would eventually do it.
We can agree on the long discourse (a lot of people just don't get itNot as novice as you might think but that is neither here nor there. I thought the primary discussion was about hitting and so I'll stand by what I said. If you want to talk about all the other aspects of the sport then be prepared for a very long discourse. I'll start with you have unlimited times to get the ball into the cup. You may suck at golf but eventually you'll do it. Not so with baseball.
Spoken like a true novice
Now for some valid points.....The great ones at hitting a baseball (the ones who can put it in play 30% of the time) have exceptional eye hand coordination and therefore make contact more than most but they still have an entire 3 acre park to use to make an acceptable result. Some great hitters can actually hit the ball to a specified general area of that park. An acceptable golf shot, for a great golfer, has a result measured in square yards down to square inches on wildly varying landing surfaces.
If you required a great baseball hitter to get a hit "this particular time at bat" the great ones would succeed maybe 35% of the time. A great golfer will succeed in making a combination of intricate shots (not just one) culminating in success (par or better) 90+% of the time.
The two feats require vastly different skill sets, one involves a great deal of luck and thus is measured at 30% success, and the the other involves pure skill. Luck, good or bad, is not part of the equation, and success is measured at 100%
Edited to add....If you're talking about hitting a baseball vs hitting a golf ball i.e. "making contact" then yes, hitting a moving baseball is infinity harder. That's where the comparison ends.
Clint, well put and pretty clear but it's not the obstacles on the golf course that matter. A sand trap or body of water is fairly easy for an accomplished golfer to avoid.We can agree on the long discourse (a lot of people just don't get itNot as novice as you might think but that is neither here nor there. I thought the primary discussion was about hitting and so I'll stand by what I said. If you want to talk about all the other aspects of the sport then be prepared for a very long discourse. I'll start with you have unlimited times to get the ball into the cup. You may suck at golf but eventually you'll do it. Not so with baseball.
Spoken like a true novice
Now for some valid points.....The great ones at hitting a baseball (the ones who can put it in play 30% of the time) have exceptional eye hand coordination and therefore make contact more than most but they still have an entire 3 acre park to use to make an acceptable result. Some great hitters can actually hit the ball to a specified general area of that park. An acceptable golf shot, for a great golfer, has a result measured in square yards down to square inches on wildly varying landing surfaces.
If you required a great baseball hitter to get a hit "this particular time at bat" the great ones would succeed maybe 35% of the time. A great golfer will succeed in making a combination of intricate shots (not just one) culminating in success (par or better) 90+% of the time.
The two feats require vastly different skill sets, one involves a great deal of luck and thus is measured at 30% success, and the the other involves pure skill. Luck, good or bad, is not part of the equation, and success is measured at 100%
Edited to add....If you're talking about hitting a baseball vs hitting a golf ball i.e. "making contact" then yes, hitting a moving baseball is infinity harder. That's where the comparison ends.
Jeff, here is where I think you are wrong. The great ones don't simply put it in play 30% of the time, they successfully hit the ball where no fielders are. That is infinitely harder than simply making contact. I realize that golf has obstacles/hazards as well that you could equate to fielders in baseball, but think of this: if a golfer does everything perfectly in his swing, reading the green, understanding his lie in the rough etc, he is guaranteed a successful shot. No, it won't go into the cup everytime, but it will go within a few yards of where the golfer intended it to go. Now if a baseball player does everything perfectly in his swing, reading the pitch etc, he is not guaranteed success. He could line a great hit right at a fielder. A good hitter will put the ball in play around 70-80% I would guess, which would be not too far off that of a golfer. Secondly, your claim that hitting it anywhere in a 3 acre lot is not true. If I put the ball into play 80% of my at bats but never got a hit, I wouldn't last long in the major leagues. The coveted prize you reference when you say, "landing a baseball anywhere in a three acre lot can produce the coveted prize." is not simply putting the ball into play, but having it land somewhere a fielder cannot get to it. Unless one of the other golfers starts batting Tiger's putts away as they are about to reach the hole, I think successfully getting a hit is harder than golfing.
Doesn't this appear to go contrary to your argument? That statement suggests that golf is indeed a much easier game.
Doesn't this appear to go contrary to your argument? That statement suggests that golf is indeed a much easier game.
Would a sniper's job be simple because they are able to hit a small target at a long distance every time?
Would a lawyers job be a piece of cake because he has a 100% conviction rate?
Would a NASCAR drivers job be easy because he can drive at high speeds in tight quarters and not wreck?
But you said a great baseball hitter has a harder time succeeding than a great golfer. The natural conclusion is that if both are great at their games and one succeeds with more regularity than the other then the one who succeeds less is competing in a harder game.
Besides, don't you have another thread that you need to be reading?
