Forums

possible bug

• VanHalenLover 1,422 Posts

  Tue, Jul 6 2010 2:28 PM

  or maybe, more aptly titled, a tale of two 9's .........

  I'm a little new here, and not very skilled at this game, so I thought I better post this information and see if it is something I am missing, or see if it is a bug that wgt needs to address......

  My front 9 today on the USGA qualifier:

  

  The 9th was a bit of a quirk, but I was having a good rou..... errrr, a lucky, unskilled round - so I dismissed it and moved on to the back 9. Things were going good, not a care in the world, and a couple more nice holes and I'm in contention. What could possibly happen.

  (Pauses while the wgt software recalculates based on current score and average)

  

  hmmmm, wierd. And everything was going so go..... errrrrrr, lucky; for me. What ever did I do wrong? I've scored under par on the back on numerous occasions, and statistically the back 9 is easier than the front. I'm left wondering what the heck happened here?

  Is this by chance a programmed change in the course difficulty, based on the front 9 score, where I shouldn't be worried about a bug or some other technical type error?

  Did my skill level take a dive between holes 9 and 10?

  Is there something about the putting on the back that I don't  yet understand that would make numerous 3 foot putts travel 2.2 - 2.6 feet when hit with 4-5 foot power on LEVEL green?

  Is there something about approach shots on the back that would make them jump upwind, on a 'dinged' shot, when they typically don't do this?

  Wait a minute, maybe it isn't the back. I'm remembering the exact opposite scenarios just a day or so ago where the back 9 played easy as sin after a troublesome front 9. Maybe there is simply something I am missing........

  wgt?

• WGTniv 1,788 Posts

  Tue, Jul 6 2010 2:51 PM

  Sounds like you just had a rough go of it on the back 9.  It's happened to all of us at one point or another.  I double bogeyed #15 in last years US Open to give it away.  I hit the bad shots, the 3 putts and lost it all by myself.

  WGTniv:

  There's no behind the scenes tweaking, no changing club attributes based on skill and no hidden mechanism that knows when you're on a water hole.

  The same holds true today as it did a month ago.

  http://www.wgt.com/forums/p/14040/86933.aspx#86933

  If this was really happening then it would be virtually impossible for any player to ever break 60.  If this were true then the game would prevent them from doing so. Yet, we see sub-60 scores posted every day.  It just doesn't add up.

• Richard4168 4,309 Posts

  Tue, Jul 6 2010 3:17 PM

  Oakmont plays fine for me VHL, I haven't qualified yet, but that doesn't mean there's a bug within the course either.

  You either have bad playing luck, or that round was purposely played like it was for you to make a statement. Tell us you didn't throw that round just to make a frivolous point?

  If anyone else would've shot that good on the front, they sure would've play good on the back, and most likely qualified. Hell, all you had to do was par, and 17 would have gave you a birdie, securing a spot in the Championship.

  I don't think you'll get a whole lot of responses on this thread VHL, others just aren't having the problems with Oakmont like your experiencing, but then again I could be wrong.

   

• VanHalenLover 1,422 Posts

  Tue, Jul 6 2010 3:33 PM

  Richard4168:

  Oakmont plays fine for me VHL, I haven't qualified yet, but that doesn't mean there's a bug within the course either.

  You clearly missed the sarcastic nature of the post Richard. I understand it isn't a bug, it is programmed deviation, and is ruining this great game.

  Richard4168:

  You either have bad playing luck, or that round was purposely played like it was for you to make a statement. Tell us you didn't throw that round just to make a frivolous point?

  I didn't throw the back 9 just to make a point Richard. I am one of the most competitive men you will ever 'meet' in your life time, and would not throw a golden opportunity. If you remember the thread of several days ago, you would understand that I have more motivation than ever to get qualified. And again, this is unfortunately not up to the players skill any longer. It is a programmed anomaly. 

  Richard4168:

  If anyone else would've shot that good on the front, they sure would've play good on the back, and most likely qualified. Hell, all you had to do was par, and 17 would have gave you a birdie, securing a spot in the Championship.

  That, sir, is the ENTIRE point of my sarcastic post. It is no longer up to the players ability.

  Richard4168:

  I don't think you'll get a whole lot of responses on this thread VHL, others just aren't having the problems with Oakmont like your experiencing, but then again I could be wrong.

  I already received the response I expected Richard. I'm not here looking for attention and couldn't care less if no one else responds to this thread. wgt has seen it and passed it off again as a non-issue, end of story. Until next time, at least.

• BolloxInBruges 1,389 Posts

  Tue, Jul 6 2010 3:39 PM

  If you spend as much time complaining as you do playing, why even bother?  Plenty of other games on the internet you may enjoy more.   Perhaps you're just not cut out for this one.

• VanHalenLover 1,422 Posts

  Tue, Jul 6 2010 4:16 PM

  BolloxInBruges:

  If you spend as much time complaining as you do playing, why even bother?  Plenty of other games on the internet you may enjoy more.   Perhaps you're just not cut out for this one.

  Perhaps you too missed the front 9 I posted on Jokemont? It should be fairly obvious that 'I got game', even to the narrow minded who wish to jump to their precious wgt's defense anytime anyone has a differing opinion.

  Got anything constructive to add, or just another typical drive-by which are fast becoming the norm? Sorry that I have complaints about the game B-I-B, but just because it doesn't match your opinion of it doesn't make it wrong, capiche?

  I'd point out the obvious flaws i your reasoning with this post, but I'm guessing the fact that you made it to begin with would also support my theory that you aren't mature enough to recognize the ignorance that was included. And sorry if I am sounding brackish, but I tire really quickly of people nosing in where they don't belong.

• Snaike 3,678 Posts

  Tue, Jul 6 2010 4:20 PM

  Without sarcasm and hyperbole, VHL....   are you trying to say that WGT has programmed this game to screw up your back 9 if you're having a decent front?

  If so, that begs another couple hundred questions....  

   

  • Why you?  It's not everybody as confirmed by the leaderboard.
  • Who chooses which rounds to screw with?
  • What could they gain?
  • etc etc etc....

   

  I've been on the end of some pretty important (to me, anyway) match play games only to fold under the pressure on the back... perhaps you just pressed too hard seeing a pretty damn good score on the front...

  I don't know, my friend... but I don't think WGT has singled you out as an example.

  You're just not that important.  (Me, either.)

• VanHalenLover 1,422 Posts

  Tue, Jul 6 2010 4:44 PM

  Hey Snaike,

  I simply don't know that ones scores does or does not have an affect on the amount of deviation from hole-to-hole or shot-to-shot, but I think the evidence overall is pretty damning. If I were a betting man, and I'd be willing to give you 3-to-1 that I'm not, I'd guess this programmed deviation was put in place to counteract the well known software that had discussed on these threads. I was actually a big supporter of some type of programming to counter it before I truly learned this game and began to master it (yes, began, I really do understand that I have a long way to go). Now that I see how the programmed deviations detract from the skill of the player and make the result of the rounds more random, I am completely against it.

  There are far too many ways to keep this game challenging AND counter the affects of such software. Ways that would keep the outcome of the rounds in the hands of the players. I don't mind having a bad round, heck, I don't mind having a HORRIBLE round if I know it is my fault, it's all part of this game we all know and love. I simply don't see my outcomes as being based upon my skill, and it is getting worse and worse.

  If this is the reason for the deviation, vemmie, whatever you want to call it, I hope they reconsider. I too, understand that poor Niv is most likely not intertwined in the developmental or programming aspects of this game, and is probably getting a blanket response to throw out at everyone in regards to this, and for that I apologize, cause he isn't the one who should have to be answering to these types of issues. Unfortunately, the wgt coders and programmers seem to be non existent in these exchanges, and that is the truly sad part of this. For a Beta test build, they sure don't seem to be interested in user feedback. One thing that TWO definitely has an advantage on, as sad as it is to say.

  And I certainly don't mean to sound like it is just me that is having these issues. I know that others are, and I also know that many others just accept it as part of the game. No problems with those that do, I simply don't share the same sentiments.

• AvatarLee 1,644 Posts

  Wed, Jul 7 2010 9:54 AM

  VaHaLo,

  Believe it or not, but I have had many score cards like yours in the Oakmont Qualifier, but I know for me it was all my own doing, because of my practice tendencies.  I tend to master a course from start to finish, and with that comes a lot of restarts and with a lot of restarts (especially because of #9) I have a lot better knowledge of the front than the back.  So yes, even though the back is 'statistically easier' it is certainly harder for me because of the lack of practice.  A flawed learning approach?  Maybe... but it's how I've approached each new course release...

  So all I am saying (and after having a peek at your score history) is maybe you and I have the same issues on the back?  Just lack of knowledge of the greens... The are after all VERY quirky!

  Just a thought...