Best Golf Tip Ever in 2020
GOLF The Best Driving Instruction Book Ever! (Golf Magazine)
- Beautiful HD streaming
- Pick up where you left off with the Continue Watching feature
- For existing subscribers, you can simply sign in to your account to get access. No need to resubscribe.
Ben Hogan's Five Lessons: The Modern Fundamentals of Golf
- In each chapter, a different tested fundamental is explained and demonstrated with clear illustrations, as though Hogan were giving you a personal lesson with the same skill and precision that made him a legend
- Covers grip, stance, posture, first & second part of the swing and a short summary and review
- Paperback size: 8" x 5A1/4"
- 109 pages Herbert Warren Wind: has been called "the best golf writer in captivity." His works include Thirty Years of Championship Golf (with Gene Sarazen), The Story of American Golf, and The Complete Golfer. Anthony Ravielli, an artist and avid golfer, used his vast knowledge of anatomy and the mechanics of human movement to show the reader the precise positions and related muscles that must be utilized to achieve success with Ben Hogan's techniques.
Harvey Penick's Little Red Book: Lessons And Teachings From A Lifetime In Golf
GOLF Magazine 500 Best Tips Ever!: Simple Techniques to Help You Improve Your Game and Shoot Lower Scores (Golf Magazine Top 100 Teachers in America)
Bobby Jones: The Complete Warner Bros. Shorts Collection
Golf My Way: The Instructional Classic, Revised and Updated
The Best Instruction Book Ever! Golf Magazine's Top 100 Teachers Show You the Fastest Ways to Shoot Lower Scores! (Book + DVD)
Putting Out of Your Mind
Gorilla Super Glue Gel, 20 Gram, Clear, (Pack of 1)
- No run control gel formula; great for use on vertical surfaces
- Anti clog cap: keeps glue from drying out, its Gorilla tough use after use
- Impact tough: unique rubber particles increase impact resistance and strength
- Fast-setting: dries in 10-30 seconds, no clamping required
- Versatile: bonds plastic, wood, metal, ceramic, rubber, leather, paper and more
Vijay Singh and the Case for Women on the PGA Tour
This essay examines the 'argument from disanalogy', which is used to deny women privileges to play on the traditionally male PGA golf tour.
Sorenstam, a multi-major winning LPGA star, and arguably the best of her generation, could make a good case for playing on the men's tour, even more frequently than she already has; her grounds could be, and have been, that she wishes to experience competition at the highest level. It is objectively true that golf on the men's tour is golf at a higher level than on the women's tour, and additionally, Sorenstam has proven her worth on the LPGA tour to the extent that her case for playing on the traditionally male tour is persuasive.
Michelle Wie, the 16-year-old Hawaiian phenom is a different sort of case. No one will dispute that Wie is loaded with talent, and is perhaps the greatest player to ever live at her age. However, Wie has not proven herself as Sorenstam has, and yet, has entered far more PGA events than Sorenstam. Though several times close, Wie has never made the cut in a PGA sanctioned event, even though she gains mega-star media attention each time she attempts to do so.
Some players and critics are supportive of both women's attempts to cross gender lines and see them as champions for women's rights. Others, though, are less supportive. PGA superstar Vijay Singh has been one of the most vocal opponents of the PGA's decision to allow female participanants to play (either by earning a card, on on exemption). Singh has used what I'll call the 'argument from disanalogy.'
Argument from disanalogy:
(1) Women should be allowed to play on the PGA tour if and only if men are allowed to play on the LPGA tour.
(2) Men should not be allowed to play on the LPGA tour.
(3) Therefore, women should not be allowed to play on the PGA Tour
Premise (2) of Singh's argument seems to be correct. Tiger Woods shouldn't be allowed to tee it up on the ladies' tour. That would be unfair. However, it is not obviously unfair if a woman like Sorenstam wishes to compete against tougher competition on a traditionally male tour. Therefore, if we want to reject the conclusion Singh reaches, we must reject (1). We can reject (1) only if we can find some relevant factual difference between the two cases that justifies a difference in treatment. Those wishing to deny Singh's conclusion have a rejection of (1), thus, as their explanatory burden.