Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

The "badgolferman" tag

26 views
Skip to first unread message

peps...@gmail.com

unread,
Sep 4, 2021, 6:56:12 AM9/4/21
to
I wonder whether this denotes someone who is genuinely bad at golf, or someone who is actually really excellent at it, but sees himself as bad
because he's painfully aware of the (very small percentage of) golfers
who are even better than him.
I was uncharitably assuming the first interpretation but, when I reflect
on my experience of competition, the second interpretation actually
seems more likely.
Furthermore, these two seemingly very different definitions may
be actually be equivalent, or only differences in viewpoint.
My reasoning is as follows: Assume X is a competitive activity -- golf/ chess/ backgammon/ darts/ tennis etc. etc. The fact that someone has thought
enough about X to label himself "bad" means that he is likely to have an
interest or experience in X that is far greater than the average population as
a whole -- at the very least, he probably means he has played X. (I'm using
"he" here because it's the badgolfer_man tag that stimulated the
conversation).
So "bad" probably doesn't mean relative to the whole population. And
it's perhaps most likely to mean "bad relative to how good he wants to be"
and that description applies to every competitor in X who is not ranked
the World No. 1.
These considerations only apply to competitive activities. If Y is
an activity that most people need to do like cooking/ communicating/ driving,
then "bad" may really mean "bad" in every sense. No reason to assume
that a self-described "bad driver" is actually a good driver.

Paul

badgolferman

unread,
Sep 4, 2021, 8:10:19 AM9/4/21
to
Hello Paul,

I find it humbling that you have analyzed my internet identity so
thoroughly. Over the years I've also noticed others seem to be
fascinated by the name "badgolferman" but more to the point of ridicule
than curiosity. Since you seem so interested I will give you the story
behind why I chose that name.

I have been playing golf for more than 40 years. During that time I
have never progressed beyond the point of shooting below 84 for a
round. I have read many books, used swing aids, watched videos, even
gotten lessons. My typical golf score is always in the 90s no matter
how much or how little I play. That is still better than the "average"
golfer which is identified as someone who shoots in the 100s.

In my early years I was obsessed with golf and would become very
frustrated when I hit a bad shot or had a bad round. Eventually I
found I had to change my attitude otherwise I would no longer play the
game I loved. That's when I realized I would never become a
professional golfer for whatever reason (no talent, no practice, no
money, etc.) and decided to just accept whatever happened that day. I
accepted that I was a bad golfer relative to what I wanted to be.

In the late 1990's I played in a golf tournament dubbed "Bad Golfer
Association" made up of a bunch of duffers. I liked the name so I made
the email address badg...@yahoo.com. That lasted for a few years
until I was invited to a new email service from Google named Gmail. It
hadn't become public yet so you had to be invited then. I could have
chosen badgolfer at gmail.com but instead decided upon badgolferman at
gmail.com because that's how I was often referred to by friends on my
daily joke list which I maintained at the time.

Since I bought a Honda Goldwing three years ago I don't play much golf
anymore, but my scores still hover in the 90's whenever I do go out.
That places me in the "bad golfer" category compared to my other golfer
friends.

Mike T.

peps...@gmail.com

unread,
Sep 4, 2021, 9:39:13 AM9/4/21
to
Hello Mike,

I do indeed find this interesting. At the risk of being platitudinous, it strikes
me that this type of situation will arise for every competitive person no
matter how good they are. You scored in the 90s and probably regretted
not scoring in the 80s which is a near-identical situation to those who score
in the 80s and regret not scoring in the 70s.
I think your level is high enough that, if you went on a round with Tiger Woods,
even when he was at his best, it would sometimes happen that you could
match his score for individual holes.

Paul

badgolferman

unread,
Sep 4, 2021, 3:35:35 PM9/4/21
to
You are perhaps correct. The bottom line is I learned to not take
myself so seriously anymore.

Timothy Chow

unread,
Sep 5, 2021, 8:45:28 AM9/5/21
to
On 9/4/2021 3:35 PM, badgolferman wrote:
> peps...@gmail.com wrote:
[...]
>> I do indeed find this interesting. At the risk of being
>> platitudinous, it strikes me that this type of situation will arise
>> for every competitive person no matter how good they are. You scored
>> in the 90s and probably regretted not scoring in the 80s which is a
>> near-identical situation to those who score in the 80s and regret not
>> scoring in the 70s. I think your level is high enough that, if you
>> went on a round with Tiger Woods, even when he was at his best, it
>> would sometimes happen that you could match his score for individual
>> holes.
>>
>> Paul
>
>
> You are perhaps correct. The bottom line is I learned to not take
> myself so seriously anymore.

Great story with great life lessons...thanks for sharing.

I agree with Paul's comment about Tiger Woods. There is a huge
difference between a score of 72 and a score of 90, but on a per-hole
basis, 72 averages to 4 strokes per hole and 90 averages to 5 strokes
per hole. Almost certainly, either the 72 player would take 5 strokes
for some hole or the 90 player would take 4 strokes for some hole, so
there is an excellent chance that for some hole, the 90 player's score
would be equal to or better than the 72 player's score. The gap between
Tiger Woods and badgolferman is bigger than that, but I still agree with
Paul's prediction.

---
Tim Chow

0 new messages