[John Kavanaugh]

The problem with pace of play has never been fast golfers. They are only a problem for John Kavanaugh.

Exactly...If all golfers played no faster than those in front of them the problem of slow golfers would no longer exist.  I think you quoted Emily Post on the need to know something is wrong for it to be rude.  The problem of fast golfers speeding up out of some testosterone induced need to get up my ass is far more likely than a slow group purposely slowing down in front.  I respect a golfers right to enjoy his day as he chooses as long as it is not intentionally adjusted to disrupt the day of another group.

[JWinick]

You can start your pre-shot routine while you're playing partner is hitting.   I see your point, but even the very fastest players take at least 10 seconds.  My routine takes about 20 seconds.  So cutting 10 seconds off of my routine would not make that much of a difference.   To get the savings you're talking about, you would need everyone to make the reduction simultaneously.  That's not likely.   

See, I think the pre-shot routine isn't that big of a deal.  It's getting to your pre-shot routine.  I take two practice swings (ok, condemn now!), but I am very quick to get to my ball and grab a club.   The actual routine takes 30 seconds - doing it in 10 doesn't save that much time. 

30 seconds!  Holy moly!  30 seconds X 4 guys X 40 pre-shot routines each (and that's just shots, not even the big time waster - putts)  = 4,800 seconds =  one hour and twenty minutes!!  The "extra ten seconds" equals 26 2/3 minutes. 

Now add putts to the equasion:  24 putts each (assume the rest are tap ins) X 4 X 30 = 2,880 seconds = 48 MORE minutes.  The extra 10 seconds = 16 MORE minutes.

26 2/3 minutes + 16 minutes = 42 minutes wasted by that "extra 10 seconds". 

You might want to re-think this one.... 

While we're at, let's ban cigar smoking on golf courses to speed up play.   I've never played with a cigar smoker that played quickly.

You've obviously never played with Da Coach... that guy's so fast, he should wear a cape when he plays.

Wait, nevermind.  The lit cigar ashes would light it on fire...  

[JWinick]

If the USGA isn't doing this kind of research, than what good are they?  I can't believe they haven't studied pace of play issues.   At least in my experience, my group tends to fall behind when we're looking for golf balls.   And, if you're using a range finder, you have a better handle on how far your ball is to various hazards.  If you're 200 to the bunker and you lay up in front of it with a 6-iron that you hit 180 yards, it narrows your search area down considerably.  

Tom,

I should have included Jwinicks name at the start of my last post as well.  I read your post, then his, and then made my post so I guess I jumbled it up there a bit on who said what. 

All that being said, I still think it would be great for the USGA to perform some kind of test because I don't think its conventional wisdom that they will logically speed things up.  Certainly if one is off the fairways all day long, then it sure seems it could help!

[Dan King]

Shivas writes:
Yes, Dan, when there's nobody in front of you, it's faster to go from tee to 300 yards out on a cart than on foot.

I can play 18 holes on a wide open course with a cart in about an hour and light change.

I can't even sniff that walking.

And I'll repeat myself. How fast you play on a wide open golf course has nothing to do with the slow pace of play problem. On a wide-open course nobody cares how fast or slow you play.

John Kavanaugh writes:
The problem of fast golfers speeding up out of some testosterone induced need to get up my ass is far more likely than a slow group purposely slowing down in front.

You obviously play courses I'm not familiar with. In my neck of the woods, I am bothered by slow golfers ahead of me almost every time I play the game. I'm bothered by fast golfers behind me maybe once or twice a year. If on the mythical wide-open course Shivas speak of, and someone who wanted to play faster came up behind me, I'd step aside and let them pass.

I respect a golfers right to enjoy his day as he chooses as long as it is not intentionally adjusted to disrupt the day of another group.

I care very little about intention.

Cheers,
Dan King

An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.
 --Robert A. Heinlein

[JWinick]

Jeff,

In my view, knowing how far you are from various hazards, helps you keep the ball on the golf course.   I have never seen anyone gun everything....  But, if I can avoid the fairway bunker, I can save time since a fairway bunker shot takes more time to play than a shot on the fairway.

Jeff - that's all very well said and works for me for the most part.  Particularly in terms of how this plays out regarding high-level competitive players, I am right with you.

I just think that when we consider this OUTSIDE of those players, it's not based on skill but rather tendencies.  That is, one has to consider who's gonna buy and use one of these outside of high-level competitive play.  And when one thinks of it this way, it's not a wash.

I really do believe that of this group, the vast majority will be techo-philes, as I described before.  And it will make things go faster for them.  They were going darn slow before in their painstaking efforts for accurate distance.  These will get such for them much faster.

Again, there will be another subgroup who will go slower, also as I described before - rich guys who just like to play with toys.  Nothing can be done about them - they are slow to begin with and while these sure don't help, their numbers are pretty darn small, I think.

So one adds it all up and... on the whole these devices do speed up play.

TH

I agree..... mostly.  

My dad, a 1-handicap, uses one and it speeds him up by at least 10-20 seconds a shot.  For the tech-ophiles I don't know.  Let me explain...

Let's assume that the average "techo-phile" without a range finder looks for an accurate yardage to the flag.  It is unlikely he will have access to information of other objects of interest (i.e. bunkers, hazards, etc.) to get accurate yardage for.  By letting him use a range finder he may shoot 10 different objects to get yardages to not only the flag but maybe bunkers, hazards, doglegs, trees, golf carts, houses, topless women sunbathing, etc.  Catch my drift?  He could spend more time accumulating useless information by using one which in turn slows him down to at least wash out the time he would save by using a range finder.  

I hope that makes sense.


Jeff F.

[Tom Huckaby]

Tom Huckaby writes:
What theory ever said that carts should speed up play, other than with no one in front of you?

The exact same theory that you gadget people are proposing now. If you make part of golf faster -- searching for yardage -- there will be a gain in pace of play. With carts, if you make the travel time between shots faster, pace of play will be improved. Both are lies.

Tell me all you want about how this gadget or that gadget made some golfer play faster. That is not the issue.

The problem with pace of play has never been fast golfers. They are only a problem for John Kavanaugh. As I said before, speeding up faster golfers is not going to speed up the pace of play. You have to speed up slow golfers. Your newest gadget in a long line of gadgets will do nothing to speed up the pace of play, and just like buggies will have a negative effect on pace.

Tell me how your gadget is going to speed up the slow, inconsiderate golfer.

Cheers,
Dan King

[Golfers] are a special kind of moral relist who nips the normal romantic and idealistic yearnings in the bud by proving once or twice a week that life is unconquerable but endurable.
 --Alister Cooke

Dan:

Again you miss the point.

These gadgets will not speed up one type of slow inconsiderate golfer.  I've stated that several times.  But I truly believe it will speed up the guy who used to painstakingly pace of yardages and now shoots and moves on.  You can label this golfer whatever you want; I just do quite firmly believe that he exists - in a large percentage of rangefinder users - and he WILL go faster.

So again, the best way to consider this is to consider who is using them and why.  If you do so, it's pretty easy to see why play on the whole speeds up.  For whatever reason you keep missing this, or refusing to consider it.

SO... once again...considering exactly who will be the users of these gadgets, well, there will be slow inconsiderate users of rangefinders.  They will go slower than they did before.  BUT... they also will be the small minority.  ON THE WHOLE, given play will speed up for the vast majority of users of the devices, play speeds up.  Again, you are unlucky if you end up behind such a slow user; but he was slow anyway without the device, so bad luck is bad luck.  You are very lucky if you end up behind a user who used to pace of yardages and now shoots and moves on.  I truly believe there will be far more of the latter.

I've explained how it plays out several times.  You can choose to ignore it, but it doesn't make it any less correct.

TH

[Dan King]

JWinick writes:
At least in my experience, my group tends to fall behind when we're looking for golf balls.   And, if you're using a range finder, you have a better handle on how far your ball is to various hazards.

There is a simple solution to that problem: GPS golf balls. The USGA has not approved these for tournaments or handicaps.

Cheers,
Dan King

I have always dreamed that when I do hit astray, I would be able to find the blessed little sphere. Thus, I would save on penalty strokes, improve my score, and save more golf balls, as well as keep playing moving.
 --Bob Fagan

[Dan King]

Tom Huckaby writes:
Again you miss the point.

These gadgets will not speed up the slow inconsiderate golfer.  I've stated that several times.

But again considering exactly who will be the users of these gadgets, well, those slow inconsiderate users of rangefinders will be the small minority.  ON THE WHOLE, given play will speed up for the vast majority of users of the devices, play speeds up.  Again, you are unlucky if you end up behind such a slow user; but he was slow anyway without the device, so bad luck is bad luck.  You are very lucky if you end up behind a user who used to pace of yardages and now shoots and moves on.  I truly believe there will be far more of the latter.

I've explained how it plays out several times.  You can choose to ignore it, but it doesn't make it any less correct.

And I've explained my position countless times. Speeding up fast golfers does nothing to speed up the overall pace of play. To speed up the pace, you have to speed up or remove the slow golfer. I am opposed to giving them another gadget to slow them down more until something is done about them.

Slow and inconsiderate might be a minority (my experience with Santa Clara County golf would say otherwise, but I'll concede your point for the sake of argument.) How many slow golfers do you think you need on a crowded public golf course to slow down the pace of play?

Cheers,
Dan King

A little consideration, a little thought for others, makes all the difference.
 --Winnie the Pooh

[John Kavanaugh]

Dan,

I find myself speeding up in an attempt to give myself an opportunity to play through a group in front of me when, if I was not such a it has to be all about me kind of guy, I would remain at my constant pace and take an opportunity if it presents itself.  

Last night I was considering the series of events that cause slow players to take longer because fast players tee off behind them.  If I am on a 4 hr pace, which is a socially accepted norm on a 7300 yd course while walking and putting everything out, and two groups who each play in 3:45 minutes and 3:30 minutes each have the two tee times behind me my rate of play rises to 4:30 because I had to stand aside and let them play through.  Now unless I allow every group behind me to play through, or go home after nine holes, the entire tee sheet is backed up at least 15 minutes not because I played slow but because the other guys played too fast.

[Dan King]

John Kavanaugh writes:
Last night I was considering the series of events that cause slow players to take longer because fast players tee off behind them.  If I am on a 4 hr pace, which is a socially accepted norm on a 7300 yd course while walking and putting everything out, and two groups who each play in 3:45 minutes and 3:30 minutes each have the two tee times behind me my rate of play rises to 4:30 because I had to stand aside and let them play through.  Now unless I allow every group behind me to play through, or go home after nine holes, the entire tee sheet is backed up at least 15 minutes not because I played slow but because the other guys played too fast.

You make a good point John, but I think we are talking about two unrelated problems.

I'd love to be able to go out and play a quick 18 at a 2 or 2½ pace. But to do that I'll either have to join an uncrowded club or go the Ken Bakst route. To play on cheaper, more crowded courses I'm going to have to compromise to a slower pace than my ideal. The problem here in California is the pace of public golf is gaining on six hours. While I have to compromise, the slow golfer is not (unless there are golfers out there that like a seven hour pace.)

Until we get to a point where we can all work toward a reasonable pace that we can all learn to live with, I have no interest in giving these slow golfers another gadget to slow them down more.

Cheers,
Dan King

I wrote to Mr. McEnroe, Senior. I said: "Here is the sentence once written by the immortal Bobby Jones. I thought you might like to have it done in needlepoint and mounted in a suitable frame to hang over Little John's bed." It says, "The rewards of golf -- and of life, too, I expect -- are worth very little if you don't play the game by the etiquette as well as by the rules." I never heard from Mr. McEnroe, Senior. I can only conclude that the letter went astray.
 --Alister Cooke

[John Kavanaugh]

The only time I truly miss home is when I am waiting on someone to putt out.

[Tom Huckaby]

Tom Huckaby writes:
Again you miss the point.

These gadgets will not speed up the slow inconsiderate golfer.  I've stated that several times.

But again considering exactly who will be the users of these gadgets, well, those slow inconsiderate users of rangefinders will be the small minority.  ON THE WHOLE, given play will speed up for the vast majority of users of the devices, play speeds up.  Again, you are unlucky if you end up behind such a slow user; but he was slow anyway without the device, so bad luck is bad luck.  You are very lucky if you end up behind a user who used to pace of yardages and now shoots and moves on.  I truly believe there will be far more of the latter.

I've explained how it plays out several times.  You can choose to ignore it, but it doesn't make it any less correct.

And I've explained my position countless times. Speeding up fast golfers does nothing to speed up the overall pace of play. To speed up the pace, you have to speed up or remove the slow golfer. I am opposed to giving them another gadget to slow them down more until something is done about them.

Slow and inconsiderate might be a minority (my experience with Santa Clara County golf would say otherwise, but I'll concede your point for the sake of argument.) How many slow golfers do you think you need on a crowded public golf course to slow down the pace of play?

Cheers,
Dan King

A little consideration, a little thought for others, makes all the difference.
 --Winnie the Pooh

Easy answer - very few, if not just one.  But that only matters to the golfers behind him.  My point remains that there are MORE users who are going faster than they were before, and thus on the whole it's a net gain, as those behind these golfers have their experience improved.

Because once again, we are not just speeding up fast golfers, we are speeding up some slow ones as well - those who were pacing off yardages before and now quickly point, shoot and move on.  Once again, I firmly believe these are the majority of users of these devices.  And again, we're not talking about slow and inconsiderate GOLFERS (good lord those must be the majority where we live), we are talking about USERS OF RANGE FINDERS.  Once again, not all golfers use the things.  It just plain makes sense to consider the actual users; not all golfers.  And for some reason, you keep missing or refusing to do this.

It's really not rocket science.  One just has to have an open mind.  Your position - which oh yes you have stated quite more than I have mine - me having only come to this repetitious thread in the last two days - is closed to the realities of how this actually plays out.

Yes, some golfers will be "slow inconsiderate golfers" to whom you "give a gadget which slows them down more."  But far more ACTUAL USERS OF THE DEVICES will go faster than these slow inconsiderate ones you cite.  And if you ask me, well... a device which makes more people speed up than slow down remains a good thing. 

It's odd to me you choose to see it differently.

TH

[John Kavanaugh]

Dear Rangegrinders,

Your leading proponent takes two practice swings and claims not to be burden to the game.  You lose! Good day sir!.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=VDW0ZnZxjn4

[C. Squier]

Here's the issue with the argument.....carts, rangefinders, and ball marks are being wrongfully blamed.  Its the GOLFER that is slow.  You can ride a cart, use a rangefinder and mark/line up every single putt on the course and not be slow.  In fact, you can be quite expeditious using all three. 

Melvyn and Dan are right, the game has changed for the worse.  But I can't blame a gadget or buggy just because a player has no idea what the proper way to behave on a golf course is.  I'm by no means a "traditional" golfer in the sense that I'll use a RF now and then (most of the time I don't), ride in a cart when the others in my group do and I mark my putts.  But I'll be d@mned if someone calls me slow.  Education of proper golf etiquette is what has lapsed and is the cause of slower play.

The next time you see someone using a rangefinder to slow a round down, or not being ready to hit their next shot (especially on the greens), instead of saying nothing and waiting to b!tch on a message board, why not politely suggest a better way for your playing partner to get the information they need.  Educate a golfer who hasn't been associated with the game for 12 centuries instead of whining about something that is already out of the barn. 

Last year I hosted a golfer at my club who took 4 pictures on every hole.  It wasn't until the turn when I noticed him leafing through the pics on his viewfinder when I asked him if he'd like to go back and take pics of some of the holes we just played.....I never even noticed he was doing it.  One can use all the modern technology they want and still be a fantastic playing partner that plays quickly. 

[Tom Huckaby]

Clint:

That is all 100% correct, and well said.

But the question here isn't slow play in general, it's rangefinders specifically.  Or at least I thought it was.  And specifically, I do believe the effect on the whole is faster play.  So if one's position against them is based on these contributing to slow play, well I would just plain disagree.

But in any case it is a very small issue and yours is a larger and far more important one... but small issues do tend to go for 15 pages here quite often.

 

[John Kavanaugh]

Huck,

Me and you have been around this site for a long time and if there is one thing we can agree on it is that the majority of posters on this site play much, much slower than they profess.

[Tom Huckaby]

Huck,

Me and you have been around this site for a long time and if there is one thing we can agree on it is that the majority of posters on this site play much, much slower than they profess.

I'd agree that they do so in outings with other GCAers; those tend to be picture and gabfests.

But I won't generalize on how they play in the real world.

[Dan King]

Tom Huckaby writes:
Easy answer - very few, if not just one.  But that only matters to the golfers behind him.  My point remains that there are MORE users who are going faster than they were before, and thus on the whole it's a net gain, as those behind these golfers have their experience improved.

Give a Ferrari to everyone on Highway 1, the pace of driving Highway 1 is still going to be stuck at the pace of the slowest driver. Yep, some of the early drivers would get out ahead of the pace, and get south quicker, but they also would have gotten their faster in a Toyota (not as fast as in the Ferrari, but faster than the later pace.) Give the slow driver gadgets on the Ferrari, and he will slow down even more than he did the week before in his Ford.

You guys keep talking about these ideal situations. These distance devices will be rented out by the golf professional, the golfers will be given minimal instruction, and one foursome will share one gadget. It will work itself out very similar to the buggie, and when we get to the 12 hour round it is going to be too late to stop this. Pros will already be making money off these gadget rentals, golf courses will be designed with these gadgets in mind, and the whole infrastructure will be in place.

How many, in hindsight, if they could have stopped the buggies in the beginning would have? I know I would have. If I could do anything to stop these gadgets I would.

Clint Squier writes:
Here's the issue with the argument.....carts, rangefinders, and ball marks are being wrongfully blamed.

I'm not blaming them. I'm just opposed to giving slow golfers more gadgets to slow them down more. Make the changes needed to play golf at a reasonable pace and I don't have the problem I have with these devices. But it is only fair the pace of play problem gets dealt with first. We  should have all learned our lesson from buggies.

Education of proper golf etiquette is what has lapsed and is the cause of slower play.

Fix that first, then lets talk about adding gadgets. Doing it in the reverse order is only going to add to the problem.

Cheers,
Dan King

So the British, of all ages, still walk the course. On trips to Florida or the American desert, they still marvel, or shudder, at the fleets of electric carts going off in the morning like the first assault wave at the Battle of El Alamein. It is unlikely, for some time, that a Briton will come across in his native land such a scorecard as Henry Longhurst rescued from a California club and cherished till the day he died. The last on its list of local rules printed the firm warning "A Player on Foot Has No Standing on the Course."
 --Alister Cooke

[Tom Huckaby]

Dan:

Well, at least we've now gone as far as we can go.

If one gets stuck behind a slow golfer, then the round is slow.  Yep, nothing one can do about that.  Although of course there is this thing called "playing through."  If that's the very bottom line for you, then this has indeed all been a waste.  I had hoped you could move beyond this and see that far more golfers are going faster due to these devices, and thus for many golfers the round is faster, but oh well.  Just do note I am surely not talking about ideal situations; I am very much talking about how this plays out in the real golf world.  But no matter.  We've gone far enough.

I'm not sure I'd prevent either carts or rangefinding devices; I see positives to each.  What I would do if I were king was require more mandatory etiquette education before anyone could play a regulation-sized golf course; kinda like what I hear they do in Sweden and other places.

But I also don't expect to be king.

TH

[JWinick]

George Carlin had a great observation on driving.  "Did you ever notice that everyone driving faster than you is a maniac and everyone driving slower than you is a moron?"   When we're on the the golf course, we tend to think kindly of our group, but sometimes unfavorably of the group ahead or behind of us.  "They hit into us!" "Those guys are slow!"

Measuring slow play per individual is difficult.  The only way I can think of is to measure each person's pace of play during a competitive round as a single.  I know when I play as a single, I can breeze through in 1.5 - 2 hours.  As a quick two-some, 2.5 hours.   

[Michael Moore]

Give a Ferrari to everyone on Highway 1, the pace of driving Highway 1 is still going to be stuck at the pace of the slowest driver. Yep, some of the early drivers would get out ahead of the pace, and get south quicker, but they also would have gotten their faster in a Toyota (not as fast as in the Ferrari, but faster than the later pace.)

Blaming the "slowest driver" for all the times in a large group is ludicrous and wildly simplistic.

" . . . 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."

Of course this applies to golf courses as well as highways.

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

[John Kavanaugh]

Winick,

Have you ever played golf wearing a bluetooth or heard a ring and answered your rangefinder?

[Dan King]

Michael Moore writes:
Blaming the "slowest driver" for all the times in a large group is ludicrous and wildly simplistic.

Read the article again. They are discussing traffic on a multi-lane highway. On a single lane highway everyone behind the slow driver is stuck going that speed or slower.

Speed up the slow driver or get them off the single lane road and the pace will pick up. I don't see anything ludicrous about that.

Is a golf course more analogous to a single or a multi-lane road?

Cheers,
Dan King

If they'd lower the taxes and get rid of the smog and clean up the traffic mess, I really believe I'd settle here until the next earthquake.
 --Groucho Marx

[John Kavanaugh]

Michael Moore writes:
Blaming the "slowest driver" for all the times in a large group is ludicrous and wildly simplistic.

Read the article again. They are discussing traffic on a multi-lane highway. On a single lane highway everyone behind the slow driver his stuck going that speed or slower.

Speed up the slow driver or get them off the single lane road and the pace will pick up. I don't see anything ludicrous about that.

Is a golf course more analogous to a single or a multi-lane road?

Cheers,
Dan King

If they'd lower the taxes and get rid of the smog and clean up the traffic mess, I really believe I'd settle here until the next earthquake.
 --Groucho Marx

Dan,

I live in a county with 15,000 people and all two lane roads with the exception of 6 miles near the river.   Our average speed far exceeds everyone of my multilane urban experiences.  We got a saying in the road biz...More lane, more pain.  We also play golf quicker, our adolescent girls start their periods later, and we talk slower.  I don't know why everytime you guys who live in the fast lane get together everything slows down.

[JWinick]

I do everything quick.... I drive fast, take 3-minute showers, scarf my food down in minutes.... I don't think you need to worry.   

George Carlin had a great observation on driving.  "Did you ever notice that everyone driving faster than you is a maniac and everyone driving slower than you is a moron?"   When we're on the the golf course, we tend to think kindly of our group, but sometimes unfavorably of the group ahead or behind of us.  "They hit into us!" "Those guys are slow!"

Measuring slow play per individual is difficult.  The only way I can think of is to measure each person's pace of play during a competitive round as a single.  I know when I play as a single, I can breeze through in 1.5 - 2 hours.  As a quick two-some, 2.5 hours.   

Your twosome would be 21 minutes faster if you each shaved 10 seconds off your pre-shot seance.    

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()