Question:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – (Kenneth Pitts) writes: According to Rubenstein, professional golfers rarely go into detail about what could have been, because they know that 90% of their fellow competitors don’t give a damn about how badly they played, and the other 10% wish they had played worse. Were you there ? My reply was intended for the 35+ other people who played in this event. Ken
Ken, Perhpas an e-mail list for the competitors in your event would be warranted next time! BTW, since you recently played Pasa, you may be interested in watching reruns of the NCAA tourney. The individual champ missed the course reord 63 by one stroke. This is a kid from San Jose state who averaged 75 and change through the college season. I don’t know if ESPN will show it again, but one would think so. — Frank Harris Department of Health Care Administration California State University – Long Beach
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – (Kenneth Pitts) writes: I have, in reviewing my round, identified a boat load of shots that were frittered away due to mental seizure, misfortune or other mishap. I feel my 83 could have been 75 if I had been sharper. Pasatiempo is absolutely a local knowledge course and I am looking forward to another chance at it. I will now bore everyone with the bloody details. (snip – excruciating detail of Ken’s round at Pasatiemp deleted) Lorne Rubenstein writes about a friend of his who always called him after each round to describe every shot of his round in excruciating detail. He contrasts this with the no nonsense way in which professional golfers describe their rounds when asked as "Good, 67", or "Bad, 75". According to Rubenstein, professional golfers rarely go into detail about what could have been, because they know that 90% of their fellow competitors don’t give a damn about how badly they played, and the other 10% wish they had played worse. Any perceived similarities are purely coincidental 
Regards, Tom D.
I obviously included a disclaimer. Did I force you to read it ? You may shut off at the point I acknowledge that the following may be boring to some. Yet, it could be interesting to others. My point was (as it had been for some time) that it is easy for amatuers of all levels to throw away shots in unfamliar playing conditions. You fished that out of a reply within a thread. Why were my descriptions excruciating ? I recall spending a sentence or two on each example of my blowing it. Once again, why do you subject yourself to such torture ? Were you there ? My reply was intended for the 35+ other people who played in this event. How’s this? I suck. I shot 83. I was lucky. It should have been 90. I would never improve with that attitude. Are you related to Seamus MacDuff ? Ken
Response:
(Kenneth Pitts) writes: I have, in reviewing my round, identified a boat load of shots that were frittered away due to mental seizure, misfortune or other mishap. I feel my 83 could have been 75 if I had been sharper. Pasatiempo is absolutely a local knowledge course and I am looking forward to another chance at it. I will now bore everyone with the bloody details. (snip – excruciating detail of Ken’s round at Pasatiemp deleted)
Lorne Rubenstein writes about a friend of his who always called him after each round to describe every shot of his round in excruciating detail. He contrasts this with the no nonsense way in which professional golfers describe their rounds when asked as "Good, 67", or "Bad, 75". According to Rubenstein, professional golfers rarely go into detail about what could have been, because they know that 90% of their fellow competitors don’t give a damn about how badly they played, and the other 10% wish they had played worse. Any perceived similarities are purely coincidental Regards, Tom D.