c4countdown

I started playing golf a couple of months ago. I've had a few lessons and it is a pretty enjoyable pursuit.. I can see why people love it even though it's not a proper sport and the handicap scoring system is wank. I have broken 100 twice but both on easy courses (Cranham and Lee Valley) with par around 67. On a real par 72 (Nazeing) my best is 105.

You?

I shot a 104 at Nazeing.

Jon Corby wrote:I shot a 104 at Nazeing.

Not bad! Just realised I typo'd in the OP - I actually shot a 100 there.

Jon O'Neill wrote:

Jon Corby wrote:I shot a 104 at Nazeing.

Not bad! Just realised I typo'd in the OP - I actually shot a 103 there.

Nice one, just one behind me then.

Edit: Oops, just realised my typo - should've said 102, obvs.

Managed a 101 at the Nazeing golf course today in the wind and rain.

Edit - just noticed that you two are talking about the same thing. What a coincidence! I'm not actually much of a golf person myself - I think it's a bit shit. But I thought I'd play a round today to see what the fuss is all about.

Nice one Gev, my 102 was my first time too, didn't really enjoy it tbh. My mate's badgered me into playing Nazeing with him tomorrow though, so I'll update the thread afterwards. Probably won't even finish as I've got a broken clavicle at the moment and I can't really swing properly.

Jon Corby wrote:

Jon O'Neill wrote:

Jon Corby wrote:I shot a 104 at Nazeing.

Not bad! Just realised I typo'd in the OP - I actually shot a 100 there.

Nice one, just one behind me then.

Edit: Oops, just realised my typo - should've said 102, obvs.

Think your quote went wrong?

MOD POWER ABUSE

I was playing some Crazy Golf thing in the Netherlands a few months ago and was thinking that the scoring system could be improved. There were lots of holes that were really hard and these were effectively the holes that decided who won because you could go for ages without getting it in. Whereas a skilful hole in one counted for almost nothing. We even ended making up a maximum score for a hole so it didn't get ridiculous.

Anyway the new system (effective from now for all golf tournaments globally) is to add up the reciprocals of the number of shots taken for each hole. Highest wins (obviously).

Gavin Chipper wrote:in the Netherlands

Any more stories?

I think every Crazy Golf I've ever played has had a maximum shots per hole. Did you read the fine print?

Jon Corby wrote:I think every Crazy Golf I've ever played has had a maximum shots per hole. Did you read the fine print?

Unsurprisingly not. I don't think there actually was any.

Gavin Chipper wrote:I was playing some Crazy Golf thing in the Netherlands a few months ago and was thinking that the scoring system could be improved. There were lots of holes that were really hard and these were effectively the holes that decided who won because you could go for ages without getting it in. Whereas a skilful hole in one counted for almost nothing. We even ended making up a maximum score for a hole so it didn't get ridiculous.

Anyway the new system (effective from now for all golf tournaments globally) is to add up the reciprocals of the number of shots taken for each hole. Highest wins (obviously).

Two words: Stableford scoring.

Surely crazy golf is played using matchplay scoring. Unless you're playing crazy golf on your own.

Gavin Chipper wrote:

Jon Corby wrote:I think every Crazy Golf I've ever played has had a maximum shots per hole. Did you read the fine print?

Unsurprisingly not. I don't think there actually was any.

Well it's nobody's fault but your own if you didn't bother to check the rules.

Ian Volante wrote:

Gavin Chipper wrote:I was playing some Crazy Golf thing in the Netherlands a few months ago and was thinking that the scoring system could be improved. There were lots of holes that were really hard and these were effectively the holes that decided who won because you could go for ages without getting it in. Whereas a skilful hole in one counted for almost nothing. We even ended making up a maximum score for a hole so it didn't get ridiculous.

Anyway the new system (effective from now for all golf tournaments globally) is to add up the reciprocals of the number of shots taken for each hole. Highest wins (obviously).

Two words: Stableford scoring.

Looks a bit shit. Mine's better.

sean d wrote:Surely crazy golf is played using matchplay scoring. Unless you're playing crazy golf on your own.

Nah. It came with a scorecard and a list of what each score meant (e.g. very good, good, bad, shit). And how does matchplay work with more than two players?

Jon O'Neill wrote:

Gavin Chipper wrote:in the Netherlands

Any more stories?

Yeah. I went to the Netherlands and Edinburgh (for the Fringe) within about a month of each other. Then in October I went to America. I went to New York, Vermont and finally Austin, Texas for the F1 race. It pissed it down in Texas for most of the weekend though. Also, I bought a pizza from the Pizza Hut stall at the track and commented on the awful weather and he said something like "It's not awful weather. Texas needs the rain" or something. Really? It's awful weather for an F1 weekend and standing around getting fucking soaked isn't it, you git?! And it's alright for you in your dry Pizza Hut stall. Order your stupid rain another weekend.

I've also been in training for a 5km race against some cunt. There's £50 riding on it. On the face of it, it would appear that the other guy hasn't done any training, but there's rumours circulating that he's been in heavy training and paid well over £50 on a personal trainer just to win this bet. That would be pretty sad.

Also, there's this guy I know on the internet who's quite an expert on voting systems - he has a PhD in maths and a website on voting stuff. He reckons he has an "in" with Justin Trudeau's government in Canada, so thinks he might be able to influence the electoral reform that's supposed to be happening there. I've been contributing stuff to that, which he seems to be taking seriously, so when Canada sorts out its voting system it will be because of me.

Gavin Chipper wrote: And how does matchplay work with more than two players?

Same as with two players. Capiche?

Ian Volante wrote:

Gavin Chipper wrote: And how does matchplay work with more than two players?

Same as with two players. Capiche?

So the winner gets a point and everyone else gets nothing? That's shit.

Gavin Chipper wrote:Also, there's this guy I know on the internet who's quite an expert on voting systems - he has a PhD in maths and a website on voting stuff. He reckons he has an "in" with Justin Trudeau's government in Canada, so thinks he might be able to influence the electoral reform that's supposed to be happening there. I've been contributing stuff to that, which he seems to be taking seriously, so when Canada sorts out its voting system it will be because of me.

I would be very interested in getting involved with this. I like Trudeau's politics and I like what he wants to do with their voting system, but I don't think what I think he's pushing at the moment (some complex system of preferential voting, I think, although I'm sure Gev will correct me) really goes far enough. However, I like that he's open to alternative arrangements, including PR, and I like that he realises how redundant FPTP is in a multi-party scenario and seems pretty committed to change it in some way.

Is Justin Trudeau the one who pissed in a coffee mug or the one who throws himself down stairs for a hobby?

JimBentley wrote:

Gavin Chipper wrote:Also, there's this guy I know on the internet who's quite an expert on voting systems - he has a PhD in maths and a website on voting stuff. He reckons he has an "in" with Justin Trudeau's government in Canada, so thinks he might be able to influence the electoral reform that's supposed to be happening there. I've been contributing stuff to that, which he seems to be taking seriously, so when Canada sorts out its voting system it will be because of me.

I would be very interested in getting involved with this. I like Trudeau's politics and I like what he wants to do with their voting system, but I don't think what I think he's pushing at the moment (some complex system of preferential voting, I think, although I'm sure Gev will correct me) really goes far enough. However, I like that he's open to alternative arrangements, including PR, and I like that he realises how redundant FPTP is in a multi-party scenario and seems pretty committed to change it in some way.

Well this is the Google Group (like an inferior type of forum), and here is the original main thread on it, but this is a newer thread.

As for Trudeau's own preferences, I'm not exactly sure. People on the Google Group have been posting what they think will work best regardless of what Trudeau's current thoughts might be. Here it says this:

We are committed to ensuring that 2015 will be the last federal
election conducted under the first-past-the-post voting system.
As part of a national engagement process, we will ensure that
electoral reform measures – such as ranked ballots, proportional
representation, mandatory voting, and online voting – are fully
and fairly studied and considered. This will be carried out by a
special all-party parliamentary committee, which will bring
recommendations to Parliament on the way forward, to allow
for action before the succeeding federal election. Within 18
months of forming government, we will bring forward legislation
to enact electoral reform.

So you can read into that what you will.

Mark Deeks wrote:Is Justin Trudeau the one who pissed in a coffee mug or the one who throws himself down stairs for a hobby?

It was definitely Jerry Bance who pissed in the coffee mug, but that was years ago. The one who throws himself downstairs, I'm struggling with. Bieber maybe? Justin Trudeau is the current prime minister of Canada and I couldn't possibly infer that he shares these traits with the other two.

Been watching a lot of Last Week Tonight lately, this is what I was referring to.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0V5ckcTSYu8

Mark Deeks wrote:Been watching a lot of Last Week Tonight lately, this is what I was referring to.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0V5ckcTSYu8

Ha! I'd not seen that before. I wasn't being snarky, I genuinely didn't know. I thought he did it quite well, although I would admit it's quite an odd thing to do unless you have dreams of being a stuntman or something.

I used to do something similar some years back, although it was usually unintentional.

Gavin Chipper wrote:Yeah. I went to the Netherlands and Edinburgh (for the Fringe) within about a month of each other. Then in October I went to America. I went to New York, Vermont and finally Austin, Texas for the F1 race. It pissed it down in Texas for most of the weekend though. Also, I bought a pizza from the Pizza Hut stall at the track and commented on the awful weather and he said something like "It's not awful weather. Texas needs the rain" or something. Really? It's awful weather for an F1 weekend and standing around getting fucking soaked isn't it, you git?! And it's alright for you in your dry Pizza Hut stall. Order your stupid rain another weekend.

By the way, when I was in America I noticed that their coins don't all say how much they are for! Their 10 cent coin just says "one dime" on it. Seriously - what the fuck? It would be like if the UK introduced a £500 note and it just said on it "one monkey". Don't disagree with me. It would be just like that.

Gavin Chipper wrote:

Gavin Chipper wrote:Yeah. I went to the Netherlands and Edinburgh (for the Fringe) within about a month of each other. Then in October I went to America. I went to New York, Vermont and finally Austin, Texas for the F1 race. It pissed it down in Texas for most of the weekend though. Also, I bought a pizza from the Pizza Hut stall at the track and commented on the awful weather and he said something like "It's not awful weather. Texas needs the rain" or something. Really? It's awful weather for an F1 weekend and standing around getting fucking soaked isn't it, you git?! And it's alright for you in your dry Pizza Hut stall. Order your stupid rain another weekend.

By the way, when I was in America I noticed that their coins don't all say how much they are for! Their 10 cent coin just says "one dime" on it. Seriously - what the fuck? It would be like if the UK introduced a £500 note and it just said on it "one monkey". Don't disagree with me. It would be just like that.

Ha, that is odd. Or just Very self-confident. For that, read arrogant.

Gavin Chipper wrote:... It would be like if the UK introduced a £500 note and it just said on it "one monkey". Don't disagree with me. It would be just like that.

That reminds me that the 50p coin issued to commemorate the Battle of Britain is the first UK one not inscribed with its denomination since the sovereign.

Gavin Chipper wrote:By the way, when I was in America I noticed that their coins don't all say how much they are for! Their 10 cent coin just says "one dime" on it.

They don't need to say anything as they are common currency and besides, they're all different sizes. This is so that blind or exceptionally short-sighted people can tell them apart by feel. Unless you have a very uncommon neurological impairment, you're not going to mix up a nickel with a dime, or a quarter or a cent, because they're all different sizes.

Paper money on the other hand is all the same size and it isn't possible to tell a $1 note from a $100 note. not unless you can see them. I wonder what that's all about?

Isn't there ridges on the paper money that you can feel with your thumb. There is on Euros anyway.

Mark James wrote:Isn't there ridges on the paper money that you can feel with your thumb. There is on Euros anyway.

There are in this country but the American paper currency I've got is all the same size and shape with no difference that I can feel. Maybe they've changed it?

They might have kept them all the same so that they can continue to do those hilarious tooth fairy mix ups in their sitcoms.

JimBentley wrote:

Gavin Chipper wrote:By the way, when I was in America I noticed that their coins don't all say how much they are for! Their 10 cent coin just says "one dime" on it.

They don't need to say anything as they are common currency and besides, they're all different sizes. This is so that blind or exceptionally short-sighted people can tell them apart by feel. Unless you have a very uncommon neurological impairment, you're not going to mix up a nickel with a dime, or a quarter or a cent, because they're all different sizes.

Paper money on the other hand is all the same size and it isn't possible to tell a $1 note from a $100 note. not unless you can see them. I wonder what that's all about?

Obviously for native Americans (you know what I mean), they don't need to say anything because they'd be used to the coins, but there are, you know, tourists as well. So saying how much the coins are worth is actually quite helpful. It would have saved me asking a shopkeeper how much that coin was worth.

Gavin Chipper wrote:Obviously for native Americans (you know what I mean), they don't need to say anything because they'd be used to the coins, but there are, you know, tourists as well. So saying how much the coins are worth is actually quite helpful. It would have saved me asking a shopkeeper how much that coin was worth.

Yeah, I suppose I was lucky that I had relatives living in the States who brought back the coins for me to see. On the other hand, if I was to visit a foreign country, I'd make myself sure of what they use for money before I went there.