[sandworm101]

It is about hitting a very small/light ball very far. It is about interaction with natural elements in real time (wind/grass etc). It may be physics but it is physics in the real non-vacuum world. Even a perfect robot could not place a golfball in the same spot repeatedly. That is the unescapable random element.

[elif]

i havent seen a robot capable of reading wind patterns from tree movement as well as humans.. again you are minimizing the deterministic factors where humans have a compelling advantage by over-essentializing perception beyond your personal capability as "random"

[sandworm101]

Look to artillery, where billions are spent on robots throwing an object through the air as accurately as possible. Randomness is still there.

[elif]

you're just making the same argument with a different subject... the same "random" argument can be applied to home runs in baseball if you wanted. hopefully you can see the ridiculousness of that example... I've researched your artillery example enough to know that artillery fire is done with a human wind calculation based upon one direction of wind... not at all comparable to human eye perceiving strength of gusts, wind alleys, etc. based upon personal experience with a certain course... but i'm not really interested in 1000 red herring discussions. please stick to golf if you really care about this.