[Melvyn Morrow]

I have just read an article on

No walking: Carts required at Eisenhower golf course 
which I found on web site http://www.exploreli.com/entertainment/localguide/golf/ny-ligolf0712,0,37172.story.

I just cannot believe it. It’s just not golf   

Is this really acceptable to any of you? 

[Kyle Harris]

I went down this road a few months ago.

[Doug Ralston]

I have just read an article on

No walking: Carts required at Eisenhower golf course 
which I found on web site http://www.exploreli.com/entertainment/localguide/golf/ny-ligolf0712,0,37172.story.

I just cannot believe it. It’s just not golf   

Is this really acceptable to any of you? 

So why is that a problem? They think it helps the movement on the course, perhaps? I know the arguements pro and con, but doesn't the course decide what is in their interests?

Enjoy the occasional ride, or do not play where you cannot walk. Same law, as a matter of fact, as my refusal to play courses costing $300. Economics, yes?

Doug

[Melvyn Morrow]

Yes, Kyle

The subject is important.

The excuse is to speed up the game or a round of golf. Also used as a
reason some gave for using electronic distance aids.

A game of golf is about walking the course, viewing the landscape, understanding the lay of the land, planning your approach, not travelling
in electric wagon trains, certainly not about speed, although consideration should be made for others on the course. But this is pure blatant commercialisation, more speed for more rounds for more money, certainly
not for golf.

How can anyone enjoy this – would you call it value for money – it’s not golf,

Clubs that have a No Walking policy Only Carts should be named and shamed, as for those who use these facilities; they are not golfers in any sense of the word.

Doug
Some care for the future of Golf, some just don't care. And some just sit and watch the world go by - yes, we all have a right to our opinion.

[Chuck Brown]

"Cartball."  So named by Sandy Tatum, cartball is a game that is remarkably similar to golf, except that that participants ride in electric-powered buggies, quite often with windshields and roofs.  Where electric-powered carts are not available, gasoline-powered carts might be used.

While having their origins in the game of golf, real golf and cartball are growing in increasingly divergent directions.  One of the latest developments in cartball is the addition of GPS distance-finding and mapping telemetry in carts.  So what was inconceivable in real golf (distances spit out by computer) is now becoming standard in cartball.

Cartball courses resemble golf courses less and less.  Cartball courses feature long rides from the last green, over winding asphalt paths through residential developments, to the next tee.  Playing golf on courses of that kind is nearly impossible due to the extended side-trips from one hole to the next.

Cartball players frequently claim that their sport has distinct advantages; of greatest importance is the ability to transport large quantites of chilled adult beverages in the carts.  For cartball players, this feature saves time (no need to go into a clubhouse grill room, after the round and speak to the groups of players who were waiting to play behind them), and serves to make holes one through eighteen largely equivalent with a 19th hole.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Kelly,
I know there are figures that show the percentage of those who play golf has diminished when compared to the ever growing population of the USA, but the number of players has significantly increased over the last 50 years and carts have been part of that rise.
I don't doubt that carts have crippled caddie programs and lost new players from that area, and that that has caused damage to the game, but I don't think it's to the extent your friend implies.

[JESII]

I spoke with a PGA club professional yesterday and he thinks that cart use may have done more damage to the game than the good that came from revenues because it basically eliminated the caddy system which fed young kids into the game.

Agreed 100%.

Short term gain at long term expense.

[mike_beene]

The game would be faster if courses supplied young,accurate tee caddies to hit drives for the golfers.

[Chuck Brown]

Kelly, get yourself a copy of Geoff Shackelford's "The Future of Golf" for more ammunition along the lines that your pro suggested.

[Kyle Harris]

Melvyn,

My gripe is that the market acceptance of carts-only or carts-preferred policies is that they allow the architect the crutch of the quarter mile or greater stretch between holes.

I still hold to the idea that one of the most important "areas" of the golf course in terms of design critique is the usage of the land between the green and the next tee. Golf car prevalence has allowed the golf course to become more disjointed and more focused on individual holes.

[Doug Ralston]

Welcome to the 21st century. Was hunting destroyed when guns replaced bows? For some.

Was transport destroyed when the car replaced the horse? For Mennonites.

Was golf destroyed when the rubber centered ball replaced the feathered ones? When the metal facted iron replaced wooden ones?

Now that golf enters more severe terrains, the cart is a logical addition. And just like you do not NEED a car to get from home to work, and a horse could do it, not everyone will insist still on using a horse. So carts WILL be used by some even when not strictly needed.

The World proceeds.

The choice is certainly yours. On courses where you are not required to ride, do not if you wish. On those where carts are required, choose either to ride or to play elsewhere.

Golf is NOT ruined! It proceeds into the future undaunted by changes. I am glad.

Doug

[Will Wittman]

I can see I'm not in the majority on this one.  I have no problems with carts.  To say that you don't have time to think about your next shot or that you cant take in the environment/scenery/world around you is IMO flat out wrong.  The only advantage to walking for me is that I get the exercise.  I do regret the loss of caddies as they bring a certain flavor to the game.

Melvyn,

My gripe is that the market acceptance of carts-only or carts-preferred policies is that they allow the architect the crutch of the quarter mile or greater stretch between holes.

I still hold to the idea that one of the most important "areas" of the golf course in terms of design critique is the usage of the land between the green and the next tee. Golf car prevalence has allowed the golf course to become more disjointed and more focused on individual holes.

In most cases I agree with you, but on certain courses it is unavoidable, and in some cases I find this highly enjoyable. For example, there is a long stretch on a local course where roads and housing were already built so golf holes were not an option but instead you have a quarter mile drive along the ocean where you regularly see dolphins and other wildlife.

For me golf is a way to get my competitive juices flowing in a relaxing environment.  Therefore I do not care if I am walking or if I am riding.  And to put and end to my rambling, I live in Florida and you couldn't pay me enough to walk in the 100 degree heat. Vive la Carts!

[Tommy Williamsen]

I have an enormous problem with carts, especially on courses that are walkable.  I am 61 and still walk and carry, sometimes 36 a day.  Part of the game is the walk.  I don't understand 25 year old guys out there in carts.  How hard is it to walk 18 holes?  We have enough fat people without encouraging them not to get any exercise.  If I play a course that has cart only, I will ask my cart mate if he/she wants to walk at all.  If the answer is "no," then I will walk unless there is a trek to the next tee.  Carts have taken a relaxing four five or six mile walk and turned it into a picnic, complete with cart wench.

Will it change? probably not, but I stay away from places that mandate carts.

[Melvyn Morrow]

Carts should only be used for medical reasons.

If you need a cart because you are just plain lazy, be honest and say so.
Don’t hide behind crap about things moving on.

Golf has always been a game of walking, it’s being corrupted by people who don’t have time and everything in their lives is about speed. Golf has never been about speed.

Well for all of you who advocate speed, the need for a quick round aided by electronic gadgets, because you are not able or perhaps just can’t be bothered to use eye/brain/leg coordination, I would suggest that you find another sport and leave golf to the golfers. 

Of course that is my humble opinion and you have the right to your own opinion (of course that is, if you have the will or time to have any).

How many of you pro cart nuts are course designer?

[Tim Bert]

I really admire courses that are designed with walking in mind and I like it when a course allows the golfer to make his own determination as to whether or not walking is practical.  At the same time, I don't have a fundamental problem with cartball courses.  Cartball courses should be limited to those in the mountains or in neighborhoods where green to tee walks are EXTREME.  They generally don't interest me because I find walking to be an integral part of the game, but if the course interests me enough then I'll try it out and I'll ride.

The course in question here is described as extremely walkable (I'm not familiar with it.)  Those are the ones where I have a problem with the no walking policy.  At a minimum, if the course needs their revenue, I think that golfers should be given the opportunity to walk for the same rate as the cart rate.

As for pace of play, I think it is a FACT that any golfer on a cart without a cart path only rule will play faster than he would if he were walking.  We simply don't walk as fast as a cart moves.  This, however, does NOT equate to play moving faster at a cart only course.  Each golfer and group has their own pace of play.  I can walk and play a course easily in under 3 hours (more like 2.5 if I'm alone) and my regular foursome walks in about 3.5 if no one is in front of us.  There are many groups that take 4 to play in carts, and we frequently wait on these groups.  Carts are NOT the answer to pace of play, and courses that hide behind that myth (especially when their cart only pace of play is 4 to 4.5 hours) frustrate me greatly.     

 

[Jim_Kennedy]

Well for all of you who advocate speed, the need for a quick round aided by electronic gadgets, because you are not able or perhaps just can’t be bothered to use eye/brain/leg coordination, I would suggest that you find another sport and leave golf to the golfers. 
...Of course that is my humble opinion- Melvyn Morrow

That's not a humble opinion Melvyn. 

You sound like someone who enjoys walking, so instead of berating those who opt for a cart, why don't you just vote with your feet and only play where they'll let you walk? Then you'll be true to your assessment of what constitutes golf and you can leave others to theirs.

It's a big friggin' world Melvyn

[Kyle Harris]

I will say the golf car has allowed developers to avoid the question as to whether or not a site "should" have a golf course...

If a course is going to have extended walks between holes, take forever to play, and cost a bunch to maintain - should it really be built?

Yes, most golfers will pay anything to play anywhere but diluting the market with tripe isn't the way to go either. Does anybody think anymore?

[Jason Connor]

The thing that amazes me is when young (I'm 33) people don't even consider walking.

I see so many people my age or younger ride all the time and wouldn't even consider walking.

Just the other day I was walking my home course and I had to hunt down a teenager working the cart barn to get a scorecard.  After my round he saw me again and said, "Wow, how was walking the course?"  as if he's amazed that anyone could walk a totally flat, short green-to-tee walk course.

[Melvyn Morrow]

Jim

Golf is walking – not motor sport

It's a big friggin' world Melvyn - you forgot to use the word ‘lazy’ before world

Keep calm – otherwise it looks like you are loosing the argument

[Peter Pallotta]

I will say the golf car has allowed developers to avoid the question as to whether or not a site "should" have a golf course... 

Kyle - that seems to me undoubtedly true, and maybe the most important impact of all ...

Melvyn - thanks for taking the purist's stance on this. I've found myself growing ever more reasonable and practical in my opinions here recently, and I'm not sure I like it...

I've played a fair bit of golf using a cart and a fair bit walking - and it seems to me that golf with a cart is not just a different game but a different KIND of game...

Peter

[Jamey Bryan]

Gentlemen:

I, for one, am growing very weary of the repetitive (very repetitive) rants against carts and distance measuring devices from folks using 460 cc drivers, graphite shafts, hybrids, cavity back irons, and ProV 1s.  The argument is philosophically bankrupt.

I, too, prefer to walk but my back will not allow carrying.  Years ago (when there were affordable caddies available) I generally took a caddy.  I agree with the statement that carts have largely eliminated good and affordable caddy programs, and that this has other detrimental effects on the future of the game (eg eliminating or hindering development of future golfers).  However, this is an entirely different argument from a statement that golf, using carts and/or distance measuring devices is not golf.  That statement is as valid as one stating that any activity not using hickories and guttas is not golf.

Please get over it guys.  It's getting old.

Jamey

[mike_beene]

If the groups in front or behind use carts,there is a change to the rhythm.I love the flow of finishing on a green and seeing the group behind just arriving at their balls.

[Doug Ralston]

This is what I love about GCA; their undiluted arrogance!

It is not enough here to say "I disagree with '........', and I would never do that". No, here it must be "I disagree with '.........' and NO ONE should ever do that"!

No one forces you to play 'cartball'. By all means, play where you can walk if you do not like riding. But why judge everyone who does otherwise? No just the course, or it's architecture, but the people who play/design them.

This issue is not the only example of this judgementalism here; is it?

*sigh* Listen to yourselves.

Doug

[Doug Ralston]

Jamey;

While I was writing, you made some of my point. Thanks

Doug

[Peter Pallotta]

Doug -
I don't think that's fair. What's wrong with anyone passionately advocating for what they believe in, or for what they'd like to see more or less of? What's wrong with stating those beliefs and aspirations on a discussion board like this one, and as clearly and forcefully and persuasively as possible? No one here is talking about legislating anything in the courts or of forcing anything on anyone, and even if in their heart of hearts they wish they could so legislate or compel, everyone here strikes me as sane and healthy enough to leave that thought right there -- and here on this discussion board, where it belongs. Might those advocating against the growing use of golf carts hope to see their belief win the day? Yes! But in what way is that different from any other kind of advocacy in the political or social realm? Do Democrats express their most cherished beliefs so that the Republicans might win? It's a discussion board. We discuss, using ideas, ideas that come out of our heads and, except for our posts here, mostly stay right there. You say "we're" being judgemental, but would you take away or like to control even the way people THINK? That would seem to me the greatest lack of charity of all. 

Peter   

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()