Jerm65:
oldbones29: was just looking to see what kind of reactions the post would get
Something to consider then....if you pose a "question" in a condescending and derogatory manner....the responses you get will likely be tailored accordingly.
I'm still trying to figure out what this has to do with the price of Gefilte fish in Japan though. ;)
I understand what you're saying, it really doesn't matter, but I also get the OP's point.
With only one shot at posting a score the scores are more realistic, still low but not stupid, plus there are a lot more WD's. I won't name names but one of the guys who posted a 53 shot a 63 in his 1st round and I think he's now WD. Another is completely missing and one of the all time greats on here has posted 2 mid 60 scores.
It's the qualifying format that is unfair in my opinion. If it was just one attempt then we would see the same thing as we have in the tournament and the cut line would be more realistic and achievable.
I shot 67 in my 1st attempt and didn't think that was too bad, although the cut was at 61 at the time, I figured I could make it. I had a few more restarts and then left it for a while. The next time I came back to it, it was at 58! Even Bollox posted again after shooting 56 to make sure. Eventually I managed a 58 and was in.....for about 3 days......then it went to 57 and I didn't get the chance to try again.
Now I know full well I had no chance of winning, but I would have played to the end if I got in. And my 67 may or may not have been good enough if it was just one shot at qualifying......but we'll never know.
Making the qualifier unlimited does give all the average players a chance to shoot the score of their life, but it also gives the top players more of a chance to rub out that occasional bad round they have and keep going until they're happy.
It should be one attempt for everyone and if the stars have a bad one, then so be it, and if they still shoot a 53, then no-one can moan because they're just too good anyway.