SatchFan
Q-School Graduate
Best I can do is a live leaderboard. Not wasting my money on Discovery+.
Either way - gash golfHe wasn't chosen.....he qualified....
Nope. Given it is 4 days of stroke play, like any normal event, does it also have a cut?
I think I'd have liked to see something different. Like pairs better ball stroke play or something of that nature.
I don't pay extra for it, Sky give it to their customers for free.Best I can do is a live leaderboard. Not wasting my money on Discovery+.
Nice little bonus. I'm on Virgin Media with Sky Sports added on but no Olympics. Never mind, it's a nice sunny day and I shouldn't be indoors watching TV.I don't pay extra for it, Sky give it to their customers for free.
Unless it's SchefflerMust admit it is a bit funny having golf in the Olympics. In most proper Olympic sports you would say the gold medal winner is probably the best in the world, or close to it. e.g. when Bolt won the 100m he was unquestionably the fastest person in the world, and so on. But the golf winner could literally be anyone and you wouldn't necessarily say the same thing.
Everyone who 'qualifies' still needs to be selected by their National Olympic Committee - just ask the Dutch.He wasn't chosen.....he qualified....
Exactly. The way they treated Joost Luiten was a disgrace.Everyone who 'qualifies' still needs to be selected by their National Olympic Committee - just ask the Dutch.
Same can be said for tennis. Neither should be anywhere near the Olympics.Must admit it is a bit funny having golf in the Olympics. In most proper Olympic sports you would say the gold medal winner is probably the best in the world, or close to it. e.g. when Bolt won the 100m he was unquestionably the fastest person in the world, and so on. But the golf winner could literally be anyone and you wouldn't necessarily say the same thing.
Or Basketball with most of the players in the NBA.Same can be said for tennis. Neither should be anywhere near the Olympics.
Not quite the same as I'd expect Alcaraz or Djokovic to win unless they cock it up in the semis or something. In golf it wouldn't be a complete shock for any mid-tier player to have a good week and win a gold medal despite being a long, long way away from being the best in the world. There are countless examples in other sports but the strongest weightlifter will probably win the weightlifting, the best javelin thrower will probably win the javelin, etc etc.Same can be said for tennis. Neither should be anywhere near the Olympics.
Originally though, Golf was in the 2nd and 3rd Olympics back in 1900 & 1904.Must admit it is a bit funny having golf in the Olympics. In most proper Olympic sports you would say the gold medal winner is probably the best in the world, or close to it. e.g. when Bolt won the 100m he was unquestionably the fastest person in the world, and so on. But the golf winner could literally be anyone and you wouldn't necessarily say the same thing.
It depends if they care enough to give it everything. If they are a bit half hearted then Mr Mid Ranking could easily come through and win it.Not quite the same as I'd expect Alcaraz or Djokovic to win unless they cock it up in the semis or something. In golf it wouldn't be a complete shock for any mid-tier player to have a good week and win a gold medal despite being a long, long way away from being the best in the world. There are countless examples in other sports but the strongest weightlifter will probably win the weightlifting, the best javelin thrower will probably win the javelin, etc etc.
Indeed they doEveryone who 'qualifies' still needs to be selected by their National Olympic Committee - just ask the Dutch.
Yeh, I do feel it should be for the amateur golfers rather than the top top pros. Just feels like another golf tournament.Originally though, Golf was in the 2nd and 3rd Olympics back in 1900 & 1904.
It was amatuer entrants in those days and maybe when it was brought back it should have been as an Amatuer Comp.
Originally though, Golf was in the 2nd and 3rd Olympics back in 1900 & 1904.
It was amatuer entrants in those days and maybe when it was brought back it should of been as an Amatuer Comp.
There's been a lot of rewriting of history when it comes to those early Olympic Games - many events (including golf) were not considered part of the games at the time but have since been reclassified as such.Originally though, Golf was in the 2nd and 3rd Olympics back in 1900 & 1904.
It was amatuer entrants in those days and maybe when it was brought back it should of been as an Amatuer Comp.
How is this any different from any other golf event? The best golfer doesn't always (ever?) win so lets just scrap golf as it is just a lottery? Loads of Major wins - just lucky?Not quite the same as I'd expect Alcaraz or Djokovic to win unless they cock it up in the semis or something. In golf it wouldn't be a complete shock for any mid-tier player to have a good week and win a gold medal despite being a long, long way away from being the best in the world. There are countless examples in other sports but the strongest weightlifter will probably win the weightlifting, the best javelin thrower will probably win the javelin, etc etc.