Jeff
With all due respect to Anthony, perhaps the question should be
‘What is most important? The game or technology’.
Looking at the Golfing Authorities the game is coming in second best.
Jeff you say that the “designs should change a bit as the game does”. I ask why is the game changing. If it is because no one is willing to actually control the technology, to use it within the current structure and rules of the game or are we always going to allow more and more technology to pour in without proper consultation. Is it the promise of money or sponsorship that is now controlling the game rather that our Governing Bodies.
I have no problem if the game is going to keep on increasing the length of the courses, due to the absurd distance carting will become the only option as walking might take up to 12 hours a round. What actually scares me is the initial cost of the project (courses) then the unbelievable maintenance costs to keep in all in good order. Who is going to be able to afford the built and how many of us will be able to pay for a round. Yes, fine design should change a bit as the game does, but who is looking after THE GAME?
Is in not time that we the golfers, architects, designers, and perhaps even the developers insisted that our Governing Bodies DO SOMETHING to protect the game.
Clearly, with the current financial and climatic constraints, golf is going to have to change. I say why not back to what it was, affordable courses in sensible locations for minimum on going maintenance costs allowing for good fair cost for a round. The equipment market should follow the Game not lead it. Standards need to be set and agreed, after all, we are no longer living in the age of a feathery ball – or has the feathery now replaced the brains of those now sitting on the committees within our Governing Bodies.
As for the Course or player option, is not the car park a course, is not a range a course if used for that purpose, so the course always seems to come first, after all we can’t keep the ball in the air all the time, can we?
Good topic Anthony, we need to consider all options.
Melvyn