Forums

Help › Forums

Shot timer poll

Sun, May 2 2010 1:00 PM (80 replies)
  • Faterson
    2,902 Posts
    Sun, Jan 24 2010 2:23 PM

    That reminds me of silly politicians. Just because Party A happened to suggest something first and it's a good idea, Party B won't admit that it's a good idea. Oh, no! That would "tarnish their image". Instead, they will propose a much worse, convoluted idea, just to be different from Party A.

    To put it plainly: TWO got this thing right, and WGT shouldn't hesitate to follow their lead in this regard. Set up variable timer for the game host, period, issue resolved.

    (And yes, I'd be happy to play with a 60-second timer, have played lots of TWO rounds that way... It's just that there might remain precious little time for chat during such a round, that's all. There are quite a few players on TWO who complain of there not being enough time to chat while playing, despite the variable timer, mainly because TWO uses simultaneous multiplayer rather than turn-based one like WGT.)

  • jayjonbeach
    689 Posts
    Sun, Jan 24 2010 3:14 PM

    Faterson:

     mainly because TWO uses simultaneous multiplayer rather than turn-based one like WGT.)

    Now there is an idea, talk about cutting down waiting and downtime. 

  • Faterson
    2,902 Posts
    Sun, Jan 24 2010 3:20 PM

    Yes, it's an option, but it has its disadvantages as well. One of the most frequent requests you'll see in TWO's forums is, "Give us turn-based multi-player, please!"

    Because, although you can watch your fellow players' "arcs", there's hardly the time to enjoy your opponents' birdies, pars, or bogeys. They often go unnoticed because you're focusing on your own shot. Much of the drama of a multi-player game therefore goes lost.

    But, the advantage is that an 18-hole foursome on TWO takes no more time than an 18-hole single-player round.

    I would very much welcome if both WGT and TWO gave us both options. Are you pressed for time? OK, play the simultaneous multi-player. Would you like to enjoy the full drama of a match? OK, play the turn-based version of the multi-player.

  • Doublemochaman
    2,009 Posts
    Sun, Jan 24 2010 3:22 PM

    Jayjonbeach...but then would there be the possibility of the Rory Sabbatini effect?

  • chipshotcharlie
    538 Posts
    Sun, Jan 24 2010 4:37 PM

    Faterson:
    To put it plainly: TWO got this thing right, and WGT shouldn't hesitate to follow their lead in this regard. Set up variable timer for the game host, period, issue resolved.

    yes as my answer

    faterson seriously if two is so good go play it and stop slamming your views down our throats we read it the first time but you cant stop there yuov got to go on &on&on give others a go

    thx chippy

     

  • jcksnghst
    71 Posts
    Sun, Jan 24 2010 4:51 PM
    No.
  • jayjonbeach
    689 Posts
    Sun, Jan 24 2010 5:23 PM

    Doublemochaman:

    Jayjonbeach...but then would there be the possibility of the Rory Sabbatini effect?

        Nice one!

  • AlaCowboy
    1,321 Posts
    Sun, Jan 24 2010 7:58 PM

    JoelWhite:

    PugsAce sez.....

     

    "What's the rush?

    I mean, c'mon... it's only a half-a-minute longer wait, at most!"  

     

    No, pugs, it's not a half-minute longer, at most. If it was, I wouldn't have started this thread. The initial shot-timer is 90 seconds....then another 90 second clock begins. After the second time period expires (180 seconds total), the player receives a 1-stroke penalty, and then a third 90 second time period begins. I know this for a fact....a friend and I tried it last night. We intentionally let the shot clocks run out, and I got the penalty stroke. The 3rd 90 second shot-clock began immediately. Who knows how long it would have gone on?

    Just curious, how many times have you played a round and had someone go through three 90 second cycles? And how many times in each game?

  • JoelWhite
    101 Posts
    Sun, Jan 24 2010 10:09 PM

    AlaCowboy asks.... "Just curious, how many times have you played a round and had someone go through three 90 second cycles? And how many times in each game?"

     

     

     

    Once, not including me and my friends' experiment last night. I played a guy a few days ago...after his drive on the first hole (Kiawah front nine), he stopped playing. Didn't freeze, the game loaded rather quickly for both of us, didn't answer my numerous queries, nothing. I sat there watching the screen, wondering what was up. He took a penalty stroke, and the 3rd 90 second time period began. I should have left the game when the first 90 ran out. Using three time periods ( I hope) is a rarity....my problem are the players talking when they should be lining up their shots, or using all of the first time period and part of the second to line up a fairly simple shot. I've played too many rounds where one player will use most or all of the first 90 seconds on each shot, time and time again (when that happens, after a couple of holes, I'll bow out...nicely). I just now left a two-player game that took almost an hour to play 7 holes on Kiawah front nine. Ridiculous.

     

    Now a word about my preferences, Player A, politicians, and so on.....

     

    When I first started complaining about players taking too much shot clock time, I stated in a prior thread, quite clearly, that I didn't care how the problem was solved...I just wanted it solved. A variable-time shot clock (with prior notification of said shot-clock length before joining in), or a set time (preferably 60+30 then a 1- stroke penalty...see my previous reply above), either would be fine with me. I don't think WGT will copy an idea from a competitor, but I'd love them to prove me wrong. Contrary to one posters' belief, I don't care whose idea it is....I just want the slow play problem solved.

  • swdeva
    238 Posts
    Mon, Jan 25 2010 12:35 AM

    No

RSS