Al, Sounds like you are on the right track in my book. If the PCS would accept my GCA certification and lower their price, I would gladly join. Even if they charged me the 220.00 for the first year to accept the certification and then would lower it to 75.00 the remaining years for being part time would be good. I am planning on going to the expo in louisville this coming year for a few days to check it out. Let me know how things progress.
Thanks, Rick -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Al Taylor Sent: Saturday, November 30, 2002 12:35 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: ShopTalk: PCS etc. was - Driving Distances On Tour (PCS) Hi Graham, You may have caught my reply to Bernie, so I won't repeat myself, but you bring up yet another interesting subject. I have suggested that the GCA certifications, at least the written exams, be accepted by the PCS. This has brought some very favorable comments and I think the Board is going to consider it. FWIW. Al At 06:35 PM 11/29/2002, you wrote: >To Bernie > >On which forum was this discussion?. I'd like to catch up on it particularly >to know what it would take to get you interested. It's also interesting to >hear of Currey's comments about hobbyists because I thought they were >considering another category of membership that is cheaper and aimed at >hobbyists. I'm a member of GCA but I'd be keen to join PCS. My reservation >is that it's pretty expensive for what you appear to get, particularly as >mine is a part time business. . > >To others >Thanks to all those who responded on the driving distances. I've now got >plenty of material to work with. > >Cheers >Graham > >----- Original Message ----- >From: Bernie Baymiller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Saturday, November 30, 2002 4:26 AM >Subject: Re: ShopTalk: Driving Distances On Tour > > > > Al, > > > > Any fires on the river up there this year to warm you up a little? How >much > > snow did you get? (We even got 4" on Mt. LeConte from about 5,000 feet >up.) > > Shoot, RK has so many years more experience complaining and arguing than I > > do...have to work overtime just to try and catch up. And now that I have a > > new kidney and might walk the course again before Spring, I could actually > > turn into one of those happy, positive kind of guys. ....nah, not much > > chance of that. > > > > Am curious as to your results with the long sticks and what you learned >from > > your practice. > > > > Speaking of arguments and complaints, Mr. Membership Chairman, your PCS > > marketing guru, John Curry, was doing some research on another forum and >in > > the process kind of made me feel that he didn't consider any hobbyists >were > > really clubmakers. Though his intent may not have been the way it sounded >to > > me, of course, I let him have it. As I got going, I kind of lurched into >why > > I'm not interested in PCS and what it would take to get me interested. > > (Think he thought I was some kind of nut, but then, he was probably at >least > > half right.) I'll copy you my response privately if you're interested...if >I > > can find it again.) > > > > Bernie > > Writeto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Al Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Friday, November 29, 2002 2:16 PM > > Subject: Re: ShopTalk: Driving Distances On Tour > > > > > > > Bernie, You Ol RK Wannabe, or Tryintobe, > > > Having tried several "long drivers" and seriously practiced with them, I > > > have to agree with your comments. I have no scientific proof of what >you > > > say, but from my experience, I can feel exactly what you describe. > > > > > > Al > > > > > > At 12:18 PM 11/29/2002, you wrote: > > > >Dave, > > > > > > > > > I wrote a comment to the USGA when they first proposed a length > > > >restriction > > > > > on clubs. If you recall, they intended to except putters from the >47" > > > > > overall length restriction. I argued that they got it backwards. If > > they > > > > > wanted to keep golf "traditional", they should ban the long putter >and > > > > > allow longer drivers. The use of the long putters is decidedly > > > > > non-traditional, if that's an important criterion. Longer drivers, > > OTOH: > > > > > * May be needed to fit tall golfers properly. > > > > > > > >Certainly agree with that. > > > > > > > > > * Carry enough problems to hit that the added distance is not at >all > > > > > "free". > > > > > > > >Don't agree with that statement. If you work to change your tempo and > > > >release timing to match the added length and swingweight, hitting a 48" > > > >driver is just as "free" as a 45" driver. And, once you find the >correct > > > >timing, you remember it as well as with any other club. You can't hit >any > > > >club consistently without practice, or playing several rounds a week. >My > > > >long drivers still are the most accurate clubs in my bag..in margin of > > error > > > >terms. In my observation, the players who have trouble hitting long > > drivers > > > >fall into two categories...those unwilling to change their natural >swing, > > > >and those with a fast hand action and late release. The latter have > > trouble > > > >making the late release with the high swingweight and longer length. >Most > > > >seniors lost the powerful late release years ago, so their principal > > problem > > > >is an unwillingness to change their swing. However, I've noticed that > > most > > > >seniors, by far, are so desperate to get some distance back, they are > > > >willing to change anything to do it. I'd say maybe 1 out of 25 won't >make > > a > > > >change. And, it's not always the swing. I have one senior who hits hits > > his > > > >drives about 220 and has watched friends, who were shorter hitters than > > he, > > > >go by him by 20 yards with 47" and 48" drivers. When he tried a 46" > > offset > > > >driver (up 1" from his regular driver), he couldn't hit it because of >his > > > >unwillingness to change his stance. He leans way forward and holds his > > hands > > > >much too far from his body, so really needs a short driver to minimize > > the > > > >big slices. > > > > > > > >Certainly the premier players (who are the "threat to existing > > > > > courses") don't push that rule at all. The regular-tour PGA players > > tend > > > >to > > > > > shorter clubs. The last time I checked, Tiger's driver was under >44". > > > > > > > >Very true. These strong, long hitters would have almost zero margin of > > error > > > >to keep the ball on the faiway at distances they would hit a long >driver. > > > >And, most have a fast hand action, so would have problems getting the > > head > > > >through square. > > > > > > > > > While we're on the subject of length restriction... > > > > > > > > > > I don't know how the USGA intends to measure it, but if I were >writing > > > >such > > > > > a rule and wanted it to be effective, I would not define length as >we > > > > > clubmakers tend to measure it. Too easy to beat the system. I would > > make > > > >it > > > > > ACTUAL OVERALL LENGTH. Now that would add quite a bit of measured > > length, > > > > > compared with the "butt to ground in address position" that we use. >I > > just > > > > > measured a driver with an Integra IV head, and the difference was 1 > > 3/4". > > > > > So if they really mean a 47" limit on actual overall length, that > > would > > > > > limit drivers to something just over 45" as we figure it. > > > > > > > >I certainly hope not. If they eliminate the one hope seniors have to > > compete > > > >with the youngsters, I may just ignore another rule...or take up hiking > > > >instead of golf. > > > > > > > >Bernie > > > >Writeto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
