I played one round of 3C tour pro (off/off) the other day - the first I've ever played with PG versus my 130 HMS rounds at Tour Pro (off/off). That one round saw me take 92 strokes and I had stats that were generally consistent with my HMS rounds. Yes, there were some 3C snaps that I didn't think were too far off and the result was a bit on the extreme side, but generally, I found it reasonable for what I expect Tour Pro level to be. I haven't played 2C or 3C in any capacity since 1997. I did play 2C or 3C between 1991 and 1997, though, so it wasn't a completely unknown swing mechanic for me. I'm not sure how else to incorporate the factors influencing MS shots with the 3C method - it just seems we need to ignore one or two of the factors or keep them all influencing. I don't have any other suggestions.
As for the current flow in the thread (and I think this is off topic), the inequality between swing methods and scoring should really be made by EVERYONE against EVERYONE. Someone uses MS, someone edges, someone has a better computer, a better simulator set up, a better mouse, a better monitor/graphics card, better reflexes, no physical disabilities, faster internet, play with 3C, play using a Xbox controller, play with simplified putting, using RTS, using MS, using a macro to swing, cheating, etc., etc. There is no way that any two players have the exact same circumstances to play their games/rounds - and so there is always an inequality. We only pretend to make things fair by trying to ensure others play with the same preferences that we have. Even with the same settings/preferences, it's not equality - and it never will be.
I think the game is plenty challenging without aids. I also think most of us are too proud to shoot high scores, hence we rely on the aids to get us around the courses with scores under or near par (maybe because we've always been good at computer games or maybe because we were decent at the real game). Few players want and are satisfied shooting over par and therefore, aids are added to our playing preferences to ensure we don't! It's our egos and the search for so-called equality that makes us turn on aids. And to be clear, I'm perfectly fine with players doing that. We should all use whatever aids necessary to get the results we want.
If our goal is to achieve higher/more realistic scores, I think it can be achieved by setting our egos aside and turning off the aids that allow us to make the low scores. If we're satisfied struggling to +3 or +13, great! If not, we can add aids to adjust our scoring to what we feel is satisfactory. If we're not satisfied shooting -7, again, turn on aids so that we become satisfied with our score. If our goal is to be at the top of the leaderboard, then we need to adjust the aids to help us get there, we need to practice our butts off so we can improve, or we can employ a combination of both until we reach that goal. If putting stats show that putting "too easy" (or too much exact information is provided) in our minds, it is in our complete control to change that within our game play preferences.
Some may argue, "but what if we're in a tournament against others - it won't be fair if I can't aim in the top view and he can" (for example). I say, suck it up and go shoot whatever we can based on our playing preferences because it will never be fair/equal. But I also say, if our aim is to make everyone (in a tournament or everyone in general) use our preferences, then we should vie for all others to use the same preferences we have. As said many times before, in the end we all should play however makes us enjoy the game. There is nothing wrong with vying to get others to accept and even use our preferences with game play, just beware that this is not likely going to fly with many players!
