Speeding up the pace of play.....

[Jonathan Cummings]

Rich -

Your circling airplanes analogy is witty and hysterical!  I can just see the captain's take-off announcement.  "Welcome aboard Pub Airlines, in just a few minutes the bar will be open and....

JC

[Jack]

Hey Dan,

I absolutely disagree with you. Your amusement park analogy is a bit off. A better analogy would be a a single ride at the amusement park where getting them on and off the ride as quickly as possible is in the park owners'  interests.

I hereby suggest the following:

We sponsor you to attend a course at Stanford on queue theory.

I respect your right to dissent.

I am glad we all disagreed without any name calling.

Your friend from the right coast.
Jack

[Tim Weiman]

Dan King:

Without a serious overall mindset change, I'm skeptical that the pace of play for golf in America will ever improve.

Still, I wonder if your amusement park analogy makes sense. If a person enters an amusement park, they can look around and decide what ride to go on. Sure, the length of each ride line will be influenced by the popularity of the ride. But, people can decide to take other rides and, in so doing, even out the demand on various park facilities.

A golf course is a little different. The holes must be played in sequence. So, a delay on a couple holes must limit the overall throughput for the course, I would think.

Isn't a pipeline a better analogy? If you have a faster pump, can't you move more product through?

P.S. I would acknowledge that the pipeline/pump analogy probably isn't perfect either. On a golf course, you don't just need one pump. You need everyone cooperating........which takes us right back the slow play mindset that has overtaken golf in the States, unfortunately.

[Pete Lavallee]

I have to agree with Dan that Rich and Jack's theory has a flaw. They say we can have players taking 10 min. per hole (10x18=180, or 3 hr.) for a 3 hour round. They would require players to tee off at 5 min. intervals to accomplish this. That would mean that 48 players (4x12) would tee off in the first hour. Within 3 hours there would be 144 golfers on the course. Hey, that's exactly how many golfers are included in a full field shotgun (8x18=144); did anyone ever finish one of those in less than 5 hours? The conjestion factor is the fly in their ointment, as soon as one group doesn't play the hole in 10 min. or less everyone behind them pays the price. The brisk pace of play in GB&I is more a factor of uncrowdwed courses than anything else. I remember most starters in Scotland instructing us to wait until the group had cleared the first green before teeing off. This would indicate their golfers typically are teeing off in 10 min. intervals across the Pond.

I totally agree however, that there are cultural factors at work that seperate the USA and GB&I contingents. Most cousres over there are provided by the community as a service to the general public, at a reduced cost to the local golfer. He therefore feels a need to the respect the rights of other golfers who are sharing the course with him. Typically in the USA, golfers are buying their round from someone who wants to make money, not make his customers happy, and that can create a whole different mindset. We have a long way to go to establish their mindset here in the States.

[Jack]

Time out.

If your point is that a saturated course has limits to the speed of play I would agree. A roadway is a good analaogy.

But I don't believe that was the discussion. The discussion was about turnover. Does a course benefit from having faster rounds. This is undoubtedly true in terms of increased capacity and a chance for greater revenue.

I am flawed but my theory isn't. What theory?

I have to agree with Dan that Rich and Jack's theory has a flaw. They say we can have players taking 10 min. per hole (10x18=180, or 3 hr.) for a 3 hour round. They would require players to tee off at 5 min. intervals to accomplish this. That would mean that 48 players (4x12) would tee off in the first hour. Within 3 hours there would be 144 golfers on the course. Hey, that's exactly how many golfers are included in a full field shotgun (8x18=144); did anyone ever finish one of those in less than 5 hours? The conjestion factor is the fly in their ointment, as soon as one group doesn't play the hole in 10 min. or less everyone behind them pays the price. The brisk pace of play in GB&I is more a factor of uncrowdwed courses than anything else. I remember most starters in Scotland instructing us to wait until the group had cleared the first green before teeing off. This would indicate their golfers typically are teeing off in 10 min. intervals across the Pond.

I totally agree however, that there are cultural factors at work that seperate the USA and GB&I contingents. Most cousres over there are provided by the community as a service to the general public, at a reduced cost to the local golfer. He therefore feels a need to the respect the rights of other golfers who are sharing the course with him. Typically in the USA, golfers are buying their round from someone who wants to make money, not make his customers happy, and that can create a whole different mindset. We have a long way to go to establish their mindset here in the States.

[Dan King]

Jack writes:
I absolutely disagree with you. Your amusement park analogy is a bit off. A better analogy would be a a single ride at the amusement park where getting them on and off the ride as quickly as possible is in the park owners'  interests.

Okay, lets go with your single ride analogy. Isn't it only important to get people off the ride to get others on once you hit capacity? As long as you aren't at capacity, why would it make any difference to the ride operator to get people off the ride?

Let's use the pipe. Isn't it only important to get fluid through the pipe when you are at capacity? As long as there is still room in the pipe, things can go in the pipe much faster than they come out. The flow only is consistent when you reach capacity.

Lets' say I operate a toll road. I charge cars at the entrance of my toll road. Excluding customer service concerns, why would I care how fast people drive on my toll road, up until the traffic jams affect the entrance?

What is the capacity of a golf course? How many golfers do you think you could fit on a golf course before it affects them playing from the first tee?

I'm not arguing here in favor of slow play. Few people hate slow play more than me. But I don't understand this concept that says it is in the course operators best interest to speed up play. The only place that matters to him is the first tee. The operators aren't charging people on every tee, or for how far they proceed in the round. They only charge on the first tee and it is financially the only bottleneck they would care about (excluding customer service concerns.)

Dan King

"The Future is something which everyone reaches at the rate of sixty minutes an hour, whatever he does, whoever he is."
 --C.S. Lewis

[Matt_Ward]

Dan King:

Once a course reaches a saturation point the word will get out very quickly that course "x" is just not worth going to. That was my initial point -- there is a financial interest for the club(s) to move people along. The benefit? It's called repeat play! Which translates into more $$$$.

Look, I don't doubt that there are people who play golf who are interested in the "show" -- the cart girl, the hoopla about smoking the biggest cigar, and all that other crap. But, there is a market in which people want to play golf and will reward their future business to those facilities that cater to that specific need.

You're right -- getting to the 1st tee is a short-sighted management's emphasis. Mine's a bit different -- it's playing the whole round. If management at any establishment is that stupid to think that people will come back time after time to a facility that does nothing to attack the issue they are in major league denial.

Many courses in America are haphazardly managed from my personal observations. They have more personnel running around the clubhouse but few, if any, really are involved with speeding up play.

Management has only itself to blame for the bottle-necks that take place. And I know many players, myself included, who will bypass those facilities that turn a deaf and dumb ear to the issue. Case closed.

[Dan King]

Matt_Ward writes:
Management has only itself to blame for the bottle-necks that take place. And I know many players, myself included, who will bypass those facilities that turn a deaf and dumb ear to the issue. Case closed.

But somehow in a wee bit more than a couple generations, we've gone from a typical 3 hour pace to a typical 4½ to 5 hour pace. It's easy to blame the course management. But we allowed it to happen. We continued to pay green fees to courses that did nothing to discourage slow play. We continued to buy more beer, chips, cigars, etc... while we waited on tee after tee.

Now we suddenly expect course managers to no longer look out for their own interests and do something about slow play. I agree with you, it is up to golfers to make course managers interested in picking up the pace. You have to boycott so that they will care, so that it will affect their bottom line.

The list of courses I refuse to play is a constantly growing list. I'd rather drive two hours to play a four hour round, than go down the street to play a five hour round. Part of this is because I do not intend to give money to course operators that allow slow play. If enough golfers did this then course management would notice. But I see plenty of slow courses with full tee sheets.

I sincerely hope a boycott will happen and work. But it is wrong to blame management. They are in the business of making money. If they thought speeding up play was going to make more money, they would do it. But until courses reach saturation that affects the first tee, or golfers boycott their course, there is no financial reason they have to speed up play.

Dan King

"Time wounds all heels."
 --Groucho Marx

[johnk]

The list of courses I refuse to play is a constantly growing list. I'd rather drive two hours to play a four hour round, than go down the street to play a five hour round. Part of this is because I do not intend to give money to course operators that allow slow play. If enough golfers did this then course management would notice. But I see plenty of slow courses with full tee sheets.


Dan King

Dan, I'm of a very similar mind and attitude - certain courses I won't play due to pace or cart rules (i.e. Eagle Ridge).

However, what do you think of Shoreline? - a place where management is very interested in pace of play.  In fact, the course has had many changes to the layout to improve the pace of play.  Many of the changes lack integrity, architecturally and sacrifice challenge or strategy, but I think they are working.

In all the pace of play is better, but the course suffers.

[DMoriarty]

Shivas, Rich, Matt and Jack:

Have you heard the one about the two physicists and the economist, stranded on a deserted island with nothing but canned beans?  The first physicist had matches, and wanted to heat the beans until the cans exploded.  The second physicist had a rope and wanted to build a pulley system to crush the cans open.  The economist couldn't believe how stupid the physicists were.  He had an easy, no-mess solution:  "Just assume we have a can opener."

My problem with your position is that you have have your golf cart before your horse.  You cannot lower the pace of play unless golfers have room to play without constantly waiting for those in front of them.  The more golfers, the more waiting, the slower the pace.  How do you propose we get from Point A (low concentration of golfers) to Point B (high concentration of golfers) without clogging the pace of play?  

To use the ferris wheel example, you can stack 400 people on a 100 person ferris wheel at one time, but you will end up with some mighty pissed off customers.  

For those that really think courses should aspire to fast play so they can stick more golfers on the course, come join me one day at my neighborhood course, Rancho Park in West L.A.  But only if you've got ALL day.  Rancho uses 6 minute tee times, and fills up every spot all day long (under $30.)  If you are very lucky and can get out before 8 a.m., you just might finish in under 5 1/2 hours.  Sure, part of the problem is that people don't play fast enough, but a larger part of the problem is that they are dumping too many golfers onto the course, with no place for them to play.  

I don't play Rancho unless I tee off in the dark; lest I risk finishing in the dark.

[DMoriarty]

For those who prefer numbers to anecdote, I will try it quantify it (Please pardon any errors or misconceptions, I am a liberal, so my calculations and conceptions are always suspect):  

Pete L's analysis was on the right track, but I don't think it goes far enough.

Let's still assume that on a perfect day, everyone plays at 10 minutes a hole (3 hour round.)  This day is not a perfect day, however.  The wind and rough are up and money is on the line, and the course is packed, so everyone is playing at a respectable 12 1/2 minutes per hole (3 hour 45 min. round).  That is the unencumbered pace, with no waiting.  Any waiting time must be added on to get an accurate total.  So if a group waits 10 minutes, their pace would be 3 hours 55 minutes.

On this windy day, golfers tee off every 5 minutes, but finish every 7 1/2 minutes.  The Second Group would have played in 3 hrs 45 minutes, but they had to wait 2 1/2 minutes for the First Group at some point during the round (because of the "pace deficit" of 2.5 minutes).  Doesn't seem to be much of a problem but look what happens as the day progresses, especially with regard to Shivas' late-afternoon "highest incremental margin"  profit makers.

Tee time: 6:00 a.m.  Round Finishes at 9:45:00 a.m.  3:45:00 per round,  Already 184 golfers on course.

Tee time: 6:05 a.m.  Round Finishes at 9:52:30 a.m.   3:47:30 per round.

Tee time: 6:10 a.m.  Round Finishes at 10:00 a.m.   3:50:00 per round.

Not bad so far, under 4 hrs. per round.  But let's skip ahead a little . . .

Tee time: 7:00 a.m.  Round Finishes at 11:15 am.   4:15 per round,  pace of play now over 14 minutes per hole, 212 golfers on the course, almost 3 foursomes per hole.

Tee time: 8:00 a.m.  Round Finishes at  12:45 p.m. 4:45 per round, pace a little over 14 min. 50 sec. per hole.

Tee time 10:00 a.m.  Round Finishes at 3:45 p.m.  5:45 hour round.
"Welcome to Rancho Park. Enjoy your round . . ."

Tee time 11:30 a.m.  Round finishes at 6 p.m., IN THE DARK.  6 1/2 hour round.  

Tee time 3:00 p.m.  Last "full round" at 3 hr. projected time.  Dark before foursome reaches 7 green. If they tried to finish, they would do so at 11:15 p.m. An 8 hour 15 minute round;  Par 3's backed up 5-6 groups deep.   "FOOOOOUUUUUURRRRRRRR."

As you can see, if you underestimate your pace, you have quite a problem by the afternoon.  Not good for business.  

Even with only a 1 minute pace deficit per hole, the pace would slow by 12 minutes per hour (5 minute projected pace).  Over 5 hours, you are an hour off.  

So, back to Rich's hypothetical.  $ 100 dollars per round, everyone finishes in the light.   First time 6 am; last time 11:30 a.m. 264 paying customers [(5.5hrs)(12grps/hr)(4 plyrs/grp).]   $26,400 revenue, and plenty of pissed off golfers.

Now compare at 10 minute intervals but use the same unencumbered pace (Rich, I am not buying every group at 6 hrs-- with no one in front-- Americans are not that slow, are they?)  No pace deficit because the potential round (6 hrs) is higher than the actual round (3 hrs 45 min.)   So the last tee time is 2:20 pm. So there are 216 paying customers [(8hrs.20min)(6grps/hr)(4plyrs/grp)].  And a revenue of $21,600.  There is a $4,800 difference in revenue (less than 20%), but everyone plays relatively fast and goes home happy.

All else being equal, which course do you think will be more financially successful over time?  

Does my analysis work and do my numbers check out?  (As if  you would not tell me if I did not ask.)

[Jack]

I am an idiot......

for joining this discussion again.

The facts as I see them.

Courses have increased revenue from number of rounds played.

Green fees are their principal and most important source of revenue.

Speed or pace of play is an important variable in increasing number of rounds played. (not the only one ).

I'll go away now.

[A_Clay_Man]

Well it's easy to see why so many turn green after crunching numbers like these.

I always thought cart revenue was way more important than the green fee. After all, there are plenty of folk who get comped.

[Matt_Ward]

Dave M:

I used to be a ranger at my local county golf course in Northern New Jersey. Many, if not all, of the staff there, and at any number of other courses across the country, have no training / orientation for their personnel on this topic. How many courses really monitor the pace of play? I've said this before -- it's a talking point -- nothing more.

You can move the tortoise type players, but when you add other elements to the golf course and make the event a "show," then yes, Dan King, I blame management big time. Management runs the course -- don't they? Management sets the terms and conditions -- don't they? Is management interested in advancing their bottom line? I would hope so. Is management being smart in the manner in which they space players? Any course that goes below 10 minutes per group must be sniffing major league clue.  

Dan, I agree with you -- I'd much rather spend time hitting balls then going through all the BS and sit behind some village idiot foursome that's plumbing 10-foot putts for a triple bogey because they're engaged in a two-dollar nassau. My question is simple -- who's watching the players when they're playing. Many times you have rangers / player assistants (whatever else they are being called today) and they simply roam back and forth and are utterly C-L-U-E-L-E-S-S on what's happening.

Many of these birds are retired types who come from the Marine school in talking to the public -- they bark more than most German sheppards!

You can cut down time when you show people a consistent approach in dealing with the issue. I can remember a group giving the finger and a hard time to an elderly gent some time ago. It was all well and good for them to be macho with four guys against one old dude. A few moments later a squad car went out onto the course and pulled the whole foursome off. They also were unable to play the course for the remainder of the season and told if such behavior happened again they would be cited for such nonsense. I know that sounds drastic but when you have Jersey attitude, as we do at some of our facilities, it becomes necessary to send a message not only to that group but to others that etiquette and pace of play are critical.

I can tell you this that a great number of people will gladly play even the half-ass layout of a course if they knew they could play in a reasonable time. If you want to grow golf then cutting down on-course time is one way to do it. Management has the keys on this issue -- I do agree with Dan that clearly management sees there's more to the investment of golf as "show" rather than the "game" it was meant to be. That's sad -- but the players will gravitate to what is permitted and encouraged by those running the show. It's as simple as that.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Management must be out front when it comes to eradicating slow play. There are many techniques to control the pace of play but none work if management is not vigilant as players will not always police themselves and there is no sense in trying to educate them once they are on the course.
One policy that works well is to make players aware that after two warnings they will be escorted from the course. A rain check is given that allows them to finish their rounds later that day or on a slower traffic day.

The best analogy to slow play comes from the transportation industry which has studied traffic jams. They have found that tie-ups can still occur for several hours after the problem has been cleared up. The slowdown is accumulative and affects those well back on the road. The same holds for the golf course. After a certain number of slow play minutes are reached this spreads back throughout all the groups and compounds as it goes.
That is why the only effective way to deal with slow play, as it is happening, is to speed up or remove the offenders early before compounding happens. This is management's responsibility.

[Jeff Shelman]

I'm not convinced that all courses truly care about slow play. If they did, would they really make all carts stay on paths? Would they really have large expanses of land between holes? Would they really hire rangers who just drive past you with a wave when you're waiting on every shot?

I can deal with the beer carts, I can deal with people stopping at the turn for a sandwich and I can even deal with a few spots where I have to wait. But I hate mandatory carts and mandatory cart paths more than four-putts. It turns a four-hour round into close to a five-hour round immediately. And if you're playing behind a group that has guys in it that aren't smart enough to take more than one club to their ball and they go back and forth, it's really frustrating.

I sometimes think all a golf course is is a vehicle to sell high-priced lots for high-priced homes. Once that happens, it seems there are more than enough people to drop $100 on greens fees.

OK, that's enough of a rant.

[Mike_Sweeney]

On last week's trip to Orlando, I found myself as the third person in each round. As there are no/very few walking courses, I always had the cart to myself. Many people simple do not understand how to play as a twosome with a cart. I had a twosome with me at Mystic Dunes, and they constantly drove each other to each shot. It was only when they got very close to the green that one would grab the cart. We were the first group off, so it was an open course in front of us, and while we finished in under 4 hours, it should have been 3:30. Nice guys, they just did not know. As the visiting New Yorker, I don't want to tell them to hurry up as we were well under the GPS suggested time of 4:15. Thus I agree that it is management's responsibility, and it has to be set up before the round, and maybe even when you make the tee time. Will it happen, probably not.

[SBusch (Guest)]

Guys,

Let me help here.  Owners and management companies absolutely DO NOT want slow play.  To think otherwise is insane.  The formula is this:  slow play equals fewer rounds per day and more pissed off customers and therefore, even fewer rounds.  Fewer rounds equals less revenue.  End of story.

Every management company I know has entire books and training manuals devoted to the subject.  If it really was management, don't you think that one course out there would get it right?  There's over 10,000 daily fee golf courses and you're telling me that every one of them is run poorly?  That's why golfers should never run golf courses:  they don't get it.

The problem is that the entire field must play as slow as the slowest person that day.  And since, at a public course, there's always going to be one foursome taking 5 hours, that means EVERYONE plays in 5 hours after that guy.  You can have 15 minute tee times, and if the guy two groups ahead of you is taking 5 hours, so do you.  Most people aren't like the people on this board.  They shoot over 100, they like waterfalls, and they eat hot dogs and drink beer on their 1 day a month away from their wives.  Most people think a 4 hour round is FLYING, and after 5 is when it's a problem.  Sorry, that's public golf life.

Why can't the course stop the guy taking 5 hours?  Two problems:  At a muni like Rec Park, anyone can play - it's owned by the taxpayers. That's where people learn to play golf.  It's going to be a 6 hour day.  Suck it up.  At a high end facility, like it was pointed out earlier, the customer paid the money, they get the benefit of the doubt. That said, courses do move people along, they do give people their money back, and we've got freaking signs EVERYWHERE (also ridiculed on this board).

Here's another thing:  5 hour rounds do not suddenly appear.  They build to that point.  The first round of the day finishes in 3 hours, and each time someone has a bad hole it adds to the problem.  Your foursome sticks 8 balls in the water on the 8th hole?  You just added to the problem bigtime, even if you have to wait on 9 - becuase now there's a backup on 8 AND 9.

To avoid it, You've got 2 options:  Join a club, or play really early.

[Jack]

Golf Course Owners are interested in maximizing the number of rounds played on their courses. There is a strong inverse  relationship between the average time taken to play and the number of rounds played ( that is, faster playing time correlates with more rounds ).

This is true ( I swear it )  

The mechanics and statistics associated with actual playing times gets a bit complicated and involves queue theory.

There are many Internet sites that give a lowdown on queue theory. This is one of them:

http://www.eventhelix.com/RealtimeMantra/CongestionControl/queueing_theory.htm

I think we need to print out these formulas and bring them to our starters and golf course managers so they can introduce new procedures ( this was a lame attempt at satire  ).

I think the basic reason for slow play is two fold:
Saturation of courses ( kind of like the roads are slow cause there is just too many damn cars on them)
Greater tolerance for slow play

These reasons are inter-related. Each helps to create the other.

Which came first?
Slow play or a greater tolerance for it.
I don't know.

I think it all started when Hubert Green's waggles got televised.  Have you ever noticed how the incidence of waggling increased after he won his first event.

Maybe it was Fat Jack's studying every putt from every conceivable angle.

We know who the slowest players on tour are but who are the fastest?

I pray that the moderator bans me from any further discussions of slow play. I am really starting to get tedious.

I am just gonna continue to avoid playing during prime hours - like weekends, and maybe weekdays and holidays and .....

I am just gonna continue going to the most run down municipal course I can find after a heavy rain in November on a weekday an hour or 2 after twilight rates have started.

[Forrest Richardson]

I have encouraged my friend, Bill Yates, to jump in to this threah. I hope he does. You might, in the meanwhile, check out Bill's website at:

<www.pacemanager.com.

[Tony Ristola]

Have to agree with a lot of what S. Busch stated.

He also hits on another point, "Your foursome sticks 8 balls in the water on the 8th hole?"  

For faster play to occur the type of game played has to change, which isn't likely.  

Stableford is the game in the developing golf nations of central and northern Europe.  When you can't earn a point, you pick up.  This is a quick game even when played by novices. The great thing is players can blow a hole and still be in the game having fun.  It also encourages aggressive play (and allows for bolder designs). When the same players compete in their rare stroke play events (club championship), they take four-and-a half to five-and-a half hours over a course which takes four with stableford.

Even on a not so punishing course, I find it difficult to see stroke play rounds taking less than three hours...or even four hours.  So long as it's an all stroke play mentality the rounds will take longer than they should...unless the patrons know the game, can play or both.  

The idea of using GPS to issue carrots (cash rebates or an earlier shot at preferred tee times) for faster rounds, and get slow players to move faster is a great idea. At troublesome courses GPS would be a valuable tool to empower course rangers and make golfers accountable.  Stats could be kept on customer performance to the operation's and individual golfers benefit.  

[THuckaby2]

Dan, I'm of a very similar mind and attitude - certain courses I won't play due to pace or cart rules (i.e. Eagle Ridge).

However, what do you think of Shoreline? - a place where management is very interested in pace of play.  In fact, the course has had many changes to the layout to improve the pace of play.  Many of the changes lack integrity, architecturally and sacrifice challenge or strategy, but I think they are working.

JK - can you elaborate on these changes at my former home Shoreline?  Haven't been there in a long time - I am very curious.  Send by email if you don't want to post here.  Thanks!

BTW, I'm with you on Eagle Ridge... but dammit, I am still too addicted to this game to participate in Dan's boycott.  If I want to play and it's the only place I can get a decent tee-time (which occurred ER recently), I'll play.  Damn this addiction!

TH
tom.huckaby@clorox.com

[Michael Moore]

Awesome thread, much better than previous discussions on the pace of play. I was inspired to do some more research on this topic, and found this article -

http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/2000/12/budiansky.htm

with this thesis -

"The eeriest thing that came out of these equations, however, was the implication that traffic congestion can arise completely spontaneously under certain circumstances. No bottlenecks or other external causes are necessary. Traffic can be flowing freely along, at a density still well below what the road can handle, and then suddenly gel into a slow-moving ooze. Under the right conditions a small, brief, and local fluctuation in the speed or spacing of cars -- the sort of fluctuation that happens all the time just by chance on a busy highway -- is all it takes to trigger a system-wide breakdown that persists for hours after the blip that triggered it is gone. In fact, the Germans' analysis suggested, such spontaneous breakdowns in traffic flow probably occur quite frequently on highways."

Perhaps the traffic analogy is flawed because, as a couple of you have pointed out, golf holes are one way and one lane.

But is it possible that slow play is caused by chaotic events that are far too subtle for us to understand or even observe ?

[J_D]

So,  some observations.

IN the past 5 years I have played a numbers (~20??) courses with Kirby Markers (there are some other equivalents out there)  http://www.kirbymarkers.com/  To my memory they all have played faster than average.

The reason becomes clearer as you examine it (pay attention Kirby) as I'll detail in a moment.  First what is it?  These are dish shaped markers typically placed in 25 yard increments.  They should be color coded (most of the time they are) and on both sides of the fairway about a yard out into the short stuff.  

It's the regularity that sets it apart from sprinkler heads.  Even if you have a "map" or yardage book, which has dots denoting the sprinkler heads you still waste valuable time circling to find them.  Then you step off the yardage, sometimes from more than one direction.  Now with the Kirby markers you should never be more than 12.5 yards between tehmm right (25/2 dummies).  Many times you can see the yardages from the cart path (if you are using a cart and have to stay on the paths) or at least as you cross into the fairway.  Amazingly simple. AND you know they are there.  For me, a 13 handicap, I usually just eyeball it.  You can tell pretty close if you're at 185 or 190 if the Kirby Markers are at 175 and 200 respectively.  This fall I played a round from carts on the path (with 2 senior golfers) and I only recalled stepping off one yardage amonst us during the round (we discussed it at the end!).  That round took less than 4 hours from the paths at Forest Greens GC just south of DC.

Its better than GPS, which if you're allowed on the fairway (useless if you are not right??) promotes waiting for your partner to play then have them drive over for a reading!

SO, I am boldly suggesting that we all promote to the USGA and everyone the use of "Dual 25 yard markers"

Comments???

[Headpro]

Can't change personallities, their are many deliberate people in this world, I am not going to change world, are you? If you have any ideas, I am all ears.