The Case Against Yardage Aids

[C. Squier]

It takes about 5 seconds to get a yardage with a Bushnell Pinseeker.  How is this slow?  I'm willing to bet that if there were no yardages on a golf course, the average player would take a lot longer than 5 seconds trying to figure out and guess how far he is away.

Not to mention the extra time playing the next shot after they guess the wrong yardage.  And you can't say that that only affects low handicappers.  Basic probabilty says that unless 100% of your shots are hit at completely random distances, taking out the extra variable (yardage) will yield more accurate golf over time. 

CPS

[JSlonis]

Even some of the "old guard" golf associations are now allowing the Laser yardage gizmos.  It was just recently announced that the Metropolitan Golf Assoc. has approved them for use in tournaments this year.  We have been using them in the GAP for 2 years now.

[Jon Wiggett]

All yardages have done for the average player is slow him down which is as good a reason to get rid of them as any.

It takes about 5 seconds to get a yardage with a Bushnell Pinseeker.  How is this slow?  I'm willing to bet that if there were no yardages on a golf course, the average player would take a lot longer than 5 seconds trying to figure out and guess how far he is away.

JS,

in days gone by (when the 3 hour round was a slow one) lots of golfers would already have eyed up the shot and selected their club before reaching the ball. A swift practice swing and the ball was on its way.

Nowadays, no thought is given till they reach the ball, then they have to unpack the range laser ajust it, check the yardage from another point, decide which club,.......

5 seconds

[Joe Hancock]

Play golf where it is windy and dry and you will find that these little yardage gizmo's don't help so much. Play golf where it is soft and still, and then maybe a few of us are good enough to capitalize on the information available.

Joe

[Melvyn Morrow]

Clint

In My Opinion I would go for 1

But would accept distance markers for
those who can't play the game without
yardage.

[TEPaul]

"Sean
I forgot nothing, and understand everything.  You need to try harder, even if your goal is just to get past the larval stage....  "


Richard the Magnificent:

I may not agree with you that often but I wholeheartedly agree with you above. Sean Arble really hasn't gotten to even the larval stage.

It is a bit off-putting when some guy like that adamantly states Tommy Armour is just flat-ass wrong about something like that. Something tells me Tommy Armour may've known a bit more about all aspects of golf than Sean Arble.

I've been through that realization myself one time. Once I was hitting balls on the range down at Gulfstream and Betty Jameson (two time US Open winner) was right next to me. She was an Armour disciple if there ever was one and she told me Armour recommended playing the ball a bit farther back in the stance than I was. I told her I thought he was wrong about that and she just looked at me and said that Armour probably knew a little bit more about the game of golf than I did. I waited about a minute and then just said to her that on a certain amount of reflection she was probably right about that. 

Frankly, if Armour could say a shot isn't blind after the first time, particularly regarding depth perception, that is pretty cool because Armour played his entire competitive career with one eye and most everyone says gauging depth perception is very hard using only one eye.

[Sean_A]

Tom

Aren't you the knucklehead that insists the course is a competitor?  I think I will stick with the low road definitions of competitor and blindness.  You can have the high road.

Ciao

[JR Potts]

"5th hole, 395 yards; A modern day architect has many tricks up his sleeve in order to challenge the golfer. Some ways aren't so subtle like forced carries over water (by the way, there are no water hazards at Hidden Creek) and others are subtle, like creating depth perception problems. In the case of the bunkerless 5th, rather than cutting a bunker into the slope at the right front of the green, Coore & Crenshaw brought in piles of dirt and built a hazard that obscures much of the green. The catch here is that the 5th green is the second deepest green on the course at 48 yards and without a good view of the hole, the author imagines that good players wll struggle in gauging the right distance for their approach shots, especially to the back hole locations."

Below is a pic which brings Ran's description to life.



What is an archie to do if folks want to rob the thrill from the game?  Isn't it time we all take a look at why we took up golf? 

Ciao

A case for yardage aids:

If I were playing this hole, and was trying to score, I would step off the distance by foot....counting all the way....1...2.....3.....123....124...125....145.....146.....multiply the time it takes to do that by 4, by the number of 4somes, and we have ourselves a horrible day of golf.

[David Neveux]

I really don't think that this type of technology really deprives from the game or the architecture.  I'm not really sure how it makes people play slower?  For me it makes it a lot quicker.  For those who want absolutely no yardage aids at all, fine, it might be tough hitting a shot with your eyes closed, but then again maybe thats real GOLF.  Melvin do you subscribe to the same playing attire as they did back in the day, I can see that being a real limitation?   The best way to sum up this issue is each to his own as long as it's legal.  Once you have seen a course 10 plus times, a lot of times you know what club / shot is required no matter where you are anyway.  That being said for the a go around on a course where you've never played and likely won't be back anytime soon, it's either a caddy or a yardage aid.  I also believe that if your gonna pay a premium price at a great course, then any help whether it be a caddie, sprinkler head, yardage guide, laser will allow you to enjoy yourself. 

If thats not your cup of tea, then hey I'm all for it.  Sincerely,

DPN

[TEPaul]

"Tom
Aren't you the knucklehead that insists the course is a competitor?  I think I will stick with the low road definitions of competitor and blindness.  You can have the high road."

Why yes, Monsieur Arble, I am---me and at least Maxie Behr. MaxieB maintained that the golf course is the only actual "opponent" but only in the sense that the golf course is the only thing that ACTUALLY CAN OPPOSE the golfer and specifically the golfer's golf ball in a physical sense since in golf a golf ball is not vied for between human opponents so there is virtually no possible way that human opponents can be in actually physical opposition to one another in the game of golf.

Would you like me to make that more clear for you Monsieur Arble? Are you aware that in the game of golf a human opponent cannot exert influence on the golf ball of another golfer? Yes, I'm sure you probably are aware of that. For that reason a golfer cannot actually be in physical opposition with another golfer or his golf ball.

If you can understand that then you are on the high road Monsieur Arble. If you cannot understand that then confine yourself to the low road which you seem to be on and I will be in Scotland before Ye!

[TEPaul]

"In the case of the bunkerless 5th, rather than cutting a bunker into the slope at the right front of the green, Coore & Crenshaw brought in piles of dirt and built a hazard that obscures much of the green."


Monsieur Arble, you are wrong that Coore and Crenshaw brought in piles of dirt for that hazard that obscures much of the green. Coore and Crenshaw do not BRING IN piles of dirt in their projects. If they need dirt somewhere they invariably generate dirt and fill by essentially going down not up first when they start. In this way they generate their own dirt and do not have to bring it in, you dumb cluck!   

[Chris Cupit]

As far as speed of play goes, the Georgia State Golf Assoc. has allowed them and continues to allow them because our experience has been that rangefinders in our competitions have sped up play.

The decision/rule that allows fellow competitors to share information regarding yardage has also helped.

I hate the things but I now own and use one and have seen the positive effect on tournament speed of play.  It is only a matter of time before you see them in USGA qualifiers and beyond.

[Melvyn Morrow]

It's clear that you don't read or understand what I write because you can't even get my name right - If you can't read my name how on earth can you read a rangefinder?

[Sean_A]

"In the case of the bunkerless 5th, rather than cutting a bunker into the slope at the right front of the green, Coore & Crenshaw brought in piles of dirt and built a hazard that obscures much of the green."


Monsieur Arble, you are wrong that Coore and Crenshaw brought in piles of dirt for that hazard that obscures much of the green. Coore and Crenshaw do not BRING IN piles of dirt in their projects. If they need dirt somewhere they invariably generate dirt and fill by essentially going down not up first when they start. In this way they generate their own dirt and do not have to bring it in, you dumb cluck!   

Tom

You are beefing with the wrong chap.  Forward your comments to Ran.

BTW

I can walk the low to and from Scotland quicker than you can figure out how to work the sat nav in yer British 4x4.

Ciao

[Dan King]

Ryan Potts writes:
If I were playing this hole, and was trying to score, I would step off the distance by foot....counting all the way....1...2.....3.....123....124...125....145.....146.....multiply the time it takes to do that by 4, by the number of 4somes, and we have ourselves a horrible day of golf.

One damn fine reason why marshals should have taser guns and the power to use them.

Your argument is strong. Either give us artificial distance aids or we will hold up the game for everyone else. But if it were up to me, I'd just kick you off the course and never let you back. Your business isn't worth other customers being inconvenienced.

Cheers,
Dan King

Something very drastic ought to have been done years and years ago. Golf courses are becoming far to long. Twenty years ago we played three rounds of golf a day and considered we had taken an interminably long time if we took more than two hours to play a round. Today it's not infrequently takes over three hours.
 --Alister MacKenzie

[TEPaul]

"BTW
I can walk the low to and from Scotland quicker than you can figure out how to work the sat nav in yer British 4x4."

Monsieur Sean:

That's very likely. As a matter of fiction there's no question of it. That nav system in me British 4x4 is a piece of Liverpudlian ref-use. Every time I come back from NYC to Philly I test it in different ways and every time it tries to take me off the NJ Turnpike at every blinking exit no matter how I program it. Even the Range Rover service department can't figure the friggin' thing out. It's no danged wonder the lymmers couldn't conquer the continent of Afrika no matter how many ways they came at it or tried to get around in it----their louseeze Range Rovers weren't worth a pence and their nav systems still ain't. My Nav system's voice component has a whole bunch of language options and I have mine programmed to a Brit. I call him Alister Mackenzie. He's actually capable of having a fairly decent conversation with me on golf course architecture but as far as helping me get where I want to go he's a disaster. I really let him have it the other day and he actually told me to bugger off.

Oh, sorry old boy, I forgot----Ford owns Range Rover now. Ford will be lucky if the corporation is still in existence in 2009.



"Tom
You are beefing with the wrong chap.  Forward your comments to Ran."

Ran Morrissett does have his good moments I will admit. But he also has unbelievably abysmal lapses in judgement. I've seen the best and the worst of him. He does do great course reviews---that is true but every now and again while analyzing golf architecture he falls flat on his face as he did with me once on the 15th fairway at Pacific Dunes and once on the 14th fairway at Sand Hills. And the night before at Sand Hills he actually left the screen door open in our room and let about 3/4 of the flies in Central Nebraska in. His pathetic excuse was that he thought perhaps 100,000 flies might actually drown out my snoring.

[C. Squier]

Then maybe a few of us are good enough to capitalize on the information available.

Joe

That is patently false.  One can refute all things on GCA, but you can't dismiss the laws of calculus.  Not knowing a yardage adds a variable, while knowing yardage takes one away.  Like I added before, unless your shots are hit to completely random distances 100% of the time, one would find it impossible NOT to benefit by knowing yardages.  In layman's terms, the sun will shine on a dog's rear once in his life. 

As for weather/turf conditions, I don't see how that muddies the situation.  One can easily guestimate how much they will affect the shot and add/subtract from their yardage.  Knowing the yardage is still more accurate than guessing in any situation. 

On a side note, I find it odd that even 150 yard "bushes" which often turn into giant conifers over time are preferred to a discreet handheld device that's not even needed on every shot.  On every course that has them, there are 36 yellow ribbons that need to be purchased and put to good use.

CPS

[TEPaul]

If anyone ever had a scintilla of doubt that golfers were nothing much more than uber-odd ducks and super silly rabbits Clint Squier's last post has removed it. 

On the other hand I agree with everything he said.

[C. Squier]

If anyone ever had a scintilla of doubt that golfers were nothing much more than uber-odd ducks and super silly rabbits Clint Squier's last post has removed it. 

On the other hand I agree with everything he said.

My mother happened to be my high school calc teacher, I had no choice.....totally brainwashed.

CPS

[TEPaul]

"My mother happened to be my high school calc teacher, I had no choice....."


Jeeesus Clint, I'm sorry to hear that. Have you consulted with Sigmund Freud about that?

[C. Squier]

"My mother happened to be my high school calc teacher, I had no choice....."


Jeeesus Clint, I'm sorry to hear that. Have you consulted with Sigmund Freud about that?

I promise my id is perfectly inline with normalcy.  Its the superego that will sometimes fly off on a tangent. 

Plus, I got a lot of free lunches.....everyone has the answers to the odd questions in the back of their books.  I had the ever-illusive evens. 

CPS

[TEPaul]

"Its the superego that will sometimes fly off on a tangent."

Of course it will. That is the very reason most of us participants are on this website. 

[JR Potts]

Ryan Potts writes:
If I were playing this hole, and was trying to score, I would step off the distance by foot....counting all the way....1...2.....3.....123....124...125....145.....146.....multiply the time it takes to do that by 4, by the number of 4somes, and we have ourselves a horrible day of golf.

One damn fine reason why marshals should have taser guns and the power to use them.

Your argument is strong. Either give us artificial distance aids or we will hold up the game for everyone else. But if it were up to me, I'd just kick you off the course and never let you back. Your business isn't worth other customers being inconvenienced.

Cheers,
Dan King

Something very drastic ought to have been done years and years ago. Golf courses are becoming far to long. Twenty years ago we played three rounds of golf a day and considered we had taken an interminably long time if we took more than two hours to play a round. Today it's not infrequently takes over three hours.
 --Alister MacKenzie

Truth be told, tournament or no tournament, I've never taken longer than 10 seconds to hit a shot...of any kind.  However, I couldn't pass up the hypothetical as I can envision this happening while I hit and walk ahead to the green.

And, why are the marshals the only one with tasers?

[J. David Hart]

If any of the 78.4% of Americans that doubt our sanity as golfers took any of these comments to court we'd be screwed for sure! As for yardage markers, I was taught (35+ years ago) they were for "speeding up"
play. There for I have and always will look at them as a "crutch" for a player that is not in a hurry. Busy courses need them, but making the game easier is sad. Self-reliance, a feel for what you are doing was and , still is important .           

[Michael Whitaker]

As far as speed of play goes, the Georgia State Golf Assoc. has allowed them and continues to allow them because our experience has been that rangefinders in our competitions have sped up play.

The decision/rule that allows fellow competitors to share information regarding yardage has also helped.

I hate the things but I now own and use one and have seen the positive effect on tournament speed of play.  It is only a matter of time before you see them in USGA qualifiers and beyond.

Chris - We have authorized the use of range finders in SC Golf Association events and they have absolutely increased the pace of play.

Golf has always incorporated distance aids in the playing of the game.

When I began playing golf there were no yardage indicators of any kind on any of the locals courses I played, public or private. But, everyone I played with knew the distances from various landmarks to the center of the greens on these courses... 150 from the big oak on #6, 175 to clear the pond from the third fence post on the left of #13, etc, etc, etc. This information was collected from various sources (including personal experience) and often written down in little notebooks that we kept in our bags. This information could really give one player an advantage over another who had not played a given course often enough to work out the yardages. Sure, you were often faced with shots that required some serious "eyeballing," but if you played a course regularly you quickly figured out the distances of the most usually encountered shots.

When 150 yard "bushes" began to appear they lessened the advantage of "local knowledge." The same with the fairway discs that started to appear a few years later marking 200, 175, 150, 100, etc... these markers just provided the same information to everyone that had previously been known to only the regular locals.

I can appreciate the argument for "natural" golf without any artificial distance aids, but would that include my doing away with the little notebook filled with "local knowledge" that I use to carry? If not, what's the point of eliminating distance aids? What's the difference between my knowing that it is 150 yards from a tree or 150 yards from a disc in the ground... or 150 yards from a handheld device?