YankeeJim: What's so outlandish about what Gary thinks?
Nothing outlandish and nothing new - these allegations have been around as long as I have been here.
I did say a high ding rate may result in manipulation (I avoided the term punishment as well) but there (my observation) is no evidence this is the case. I do believe that the program may read your game and turn up or turn down variation - whether you hit the ding a lot, or conversely miss it a lot.What the parameters are is pure conjecture and for every arguement for, there is an arguement against.
I have in the past taken detailed notes delve into this, and every time I think I have a solution there is a counter argument.
Whether or not a flash based game has the ability to record and then manipulate data such as a ding is another thing - one which I am not qualified to say.
This is explains the great start/bad start scenarios that we all have.
Replays show nothing - and I believe this is why WGT will never add the full details - only the result that is inconclusive.
Again from my experience, ding or close to it will produce a much better shot than a missing it by more than a few pixels.
But when players start saying it is 50 -60 yards long or 20 -30 yards short I will place my bottom dollar on it being player error or a bug. This has nothing to do with the circle or precision. !0 yards or so, yes I will believe. This is where tin foil hats are needed.