[Dan Herrmann]

Yes - I have a Sky Caddy, but I do understand Melvyn's point of view.

About 12 years ago, a couple of friends and I joined a Monday night bowling league in Beaverton, OR.  We worked together at Nike and thought it'd be a fun way to get out of the house (which it was).

Anyway - we (all golfers and very much not serious bowlers) couldn't believe the crap these guys were using on their arms, their wrists, their feet, and yes - their bowling balls.  Essentially they had turned into Star Wars-style robots flinging the ball down the lane.  The skill was gone.

I fear that golf could become as "Kingpin" as bowling if it gets out of hand.    I, for one, much prefer it to stay the way it is, and if I need to give up my GPS, so be it.  (but believe me - the GPS doesn't help my score - it just help me play faster)

[Dean Stokes]

Melvyn,

Childish comments? I asked you a simple question. Are you using modern day equipment?

In my eyes the ball and clubs are the only thing ruining golf and great old golf courses. They help people with less talent play to a higher standard than they would have done with balatas and a tiny headed persimmon.

So if you need these modern advances to help you Melvyn, have at it.  As for me, I'll go back to the persimmons,  walk the yardages off and I'll give you all the shots you need.

The range finder doesn't contribute to my scores, talent, practice and knowing the rules does.

[JWinick]

Melyvn,

Nobody is interested in your family.  It was a complete coincidence that you have some relation to Old Tom Morris.   Although it does explain to me how you've annointed yourself the guardian of the game.   

Your bitterness shines through.  You know you're losing the battle, so you resort to desperate childless attacks.   Why are you on the internet then if you hate technology so much? 

Dean/Michael/JWinick

Your comments are what I expect from players who will resort to any ploy to win – keep your toys well charged, sounds like you need them – sorry you can’t play without them.

As for McCarthy, no I leave that to those over the pond, I am stating my true and honest felt opinion which is of course not acceptable to you. I am waiting for some comment about my parents or Old Tom next.

Guys, your comments project as much yardage as your toys when the batteries are flat.

Thanks Adam

[John Kavanaugh]

Pacing from yardage markers is nothing like shooting a distance with an electronic device.  As a proffesional engineer  who makes his living estimating quantities in the field I know that my average stride is 2.71 feet.  I also know how to triangulate a 3.4.5 triangle off the cuff and where our super has no clue on how to write a pin sheet.  Most amateurs can not pace and estimate the distance to a pin any closer than plus or minus three yards.  Range finders remove an aspect of art from the game that is not lost pacing or using a caddie.

[JWinick]

Dan,

I have faith that the guardians of our game will never permit technology from ruining the game.   You are a Sky Caddy user and you believe it speeds up play.   As do I.   Pace of play (along with cost) always shows up as one of the biggest issues golfers have with the game.   We need to encourage ways to address this issue.  

If the game loses too many consumers, the market will do far more damage to some great courses that we all cherish.  

Yes - I have a Sky Caddy, but I do understand Melvyn's point of view.

About 12 years ago, a couple of friends and I joined a Monday night bowling league in Beaverton, OR.  We worked together at Nike and thought it'd be a fun way to get out of the house (which it was).

Anyway - we (all golfers and very much not serious bowlers) couldn't believe the crap these guys were using on their arms, their wrists, their feet, and yes - their bowling balls.  Essentially they had turned into Star Wars-style robots flinging the ball down the lane.  The skill was gone.

I fear that golf could become as "Kingpin" as bowling if it gets out of hand.    I, for one, much prefer it to stay the way it is, and if I need to give up my GPS, so be it.  (but believe me - the GPS doesn't help my score - it just help me play faster)

[Bill_McBride]

Dean,
You mean to tell me that Friars Head has no yardage on their scorecards?  I gotta see this.  Someone please scan it and post here.

Dean and Bill,
Wind speed?  wind direction?  elevation change?  I thought we were talking about yardage, but now I get it.  You guys think that electronic distance devises are the evil twin brother to the automated telescope putter of one Al Czervik.

It's your argument.  If lasers are legal, how long will take before the next instrument of technology helps golfers decide what club to play?

[Andy Troeger]

Most amateurs can not pace and estimate the distance to a pin any closer than plus or minus three yards.  

And they can't hit it to within +/- 10 yards of that so it makes little to no difference in their games 

[Dean Stokes]

Bill, the only technological advances that improve your chance to score, are ones that have something to do with swinging the club or hitting the ball.

The range finder does neither. It cannot help you win at golf. I will get the correct yardage whether I use it or not. It merely speeds up my play and saves me wandering around looking for sprinkler heads on courses I do not know.

As for the majority of amateur golfers using one - how many amateurs can actually hit the ball close to the yardage they have on a consistent basis?

[Tim Bert]

My stance is more in the middle, though I personally haven't found a need for all of these yardage gadgets.

1. I don't mind others using them, but like others have mentioned here I find it annoying when someone goes out of their way to force my yardages on me throughout the round.  This is most annoying at my home course where I know what clubs to hit based on my paced yardages from sprinkler heads.  I've played the course enough to trust my distances.  Do I really need someone chiming in with a distance that 5 or 10 yards off my calculated distance?  No thank you.  Those yardages may in fact be correct, but all it means is that I hit my clubs a slightly different distance than I really think I do.

2. I don't think they give players at my skill level (currently a 9 index) an advantage.  If you can hit your irons to an exact distance and you have the same handicap as me, then you must either be a big sandbagger or you must be the worst putter or driver that has ever stepped foot on a course.    

3. While I do like to know the distance to the green with a fair level of accuracy, I like to judge distances to carry bunkers, hazards, and such by feel and appearance.  It's just a personal preference that adds enjoyment.

4. I think the yardage tools by and large are just another product of the lazy society.  It is an extension of the cart.  Heaven forbid that as you are walking to your ball you find a sprinkler head or 150 marker and walk it off.  I think that many golfers, if they could, would ride around in a cart and hit buttons to simulate hitting shots just to avoid any physical movement.  Take it easy... I'm only partly serious here.

5. Any golfer whose pace of play benefits from these gadgets had some pace of play issues that weren't related to simply stepping off yardage.  I can do it quite effectively without disturbing my playing partners and without my group being unduly delayed.  Most guys with pace of play issues will find plenty of other reasons to fall behind even if they can zap their yardage instantly.  Multiple practice swings, lining up putts from multiple angles, chatting on the tee box when the group ahead is out of range, etc.  I would venture a guess that most golfers who imrpove pace of play with a range finder probably didn't have much of a need to improve their pace of play.  (No, JK, I'm not advocating a race either.  I enjoy a relaxed pace of play as much as anyone, particularly at a resort course like Bandon.  Relaxed to me is just 4:00 for a foursome as opposed to 4:30 or 5:00.  At my home course I prefer to play in slightly less than 4:00 as a foursome and my group plays at times that this is possible.  If we show up to play at noon on a weekend, then we expect a 4:00+ round.)

[RSLivingston_III]

I disagree. Rangefinders help to eliminate the visual distraction of the architectural features by giving you an absolute distance, thus changing the confidence level with which you hit the ball. If the architecture doesn't make you question your shot why have the elaborate design?

[Michael Powers]

Bill,
I just sent over my telescope putter to Far Hills for review.  It has a digital bulls eye that blinks red when it's time to pull the trigger.  Just like Al's.  I hope they approve it.

[John Kavanaugh]

Most amateurs can not pace and estimate the distance to a pin any closer than plus or minus three yards.  

And they can't hit it to within +/- 10 yards of that so it makes little to no difference in their games 

Thank you for pointing out that PT Barnum would have sold range finders under the big tent.

[Paul Saathoff]

Melvyn, what kind of driver do you use? Persimmon, hickory shaft? You wouldn't be using a modern one with a massive head and graphite shaft that goes 60 yards further than those I just mentioned?

If so why would you complain about people using range finders?

Artificial aid? The range finder doesn't hit the damn ball does it. The biggest artificial aids of all are the clubs and the ball. I suppose you're still using balatas are you?

Dean has nailed this one on the head.  If all you "traditionalists" are so passionate about your cause, why not go all out!  Quit half assing your traditionalist beliefs and just go for it man.  Pick up some hickories (maybe some featheries even), find a course with no irrigation or modern maintenance practices, and you guys can have yourself a ball.  Perhaps you could all travel there by horse and buggy (or bike if you choose).      

[Paul Saathoff]

I disagree. Rangefinders help to eliminate the visual distraction of the architectural features by giving you an absolute distance, thus changing the confidence level with which you hit the ball. If the architecture doesn't make you question your shot why have the elaborate design?

Do you ever ponder the consequences of missing a green or fairway before you hit a shot... I think this is truly the great mental aspect of architecture.  Not some guessing game on how far away something might or might not be. 

[JWinick]

Ralph:

The Rangefinders approved for tournament play do not give you elevation.   Nor wind or the slope of the green.   

As for the architecture, there is no difference in knowing your distances.  You still are distracted by water, or any other hazard.  If you don't know the distance you're less likely to go for a shot so you might just lay up with your tail between your legs. 

I disagree. Rangefinders help to eliminate the visual distraction of the architectural features by giving you an absolute distance, thus changing the confidence level with which you hit the ball. If the architecture doesn't make you question your shot why have the elaborate design?

[Adam Clayman]

Dean has nailed this one on the head.  If all you "traditionalists" are so passionate about your cause, why not go all out!  Quit half assing your traditionalist beliefs and just go for it man.  Pick up some hickories (maybe some featheries even), find a course with no irrigation or modern maintenance practices, and you guys can have yourself a ball.  Perhaps you could all travel there by horse and buggy (or bike if you choose).      

Melvyn, In the spirit nay evident above, let this baiting post go. If we were discussing I&B you'd have a green light. But since the poster obviously needs all the help he can get, reading the specific topic, surely yardages could take awhile without some aid.

JWinick wrote I have faith that the guardians of our game will never permit technology from ruining the game.

Thanks for the faith based opinion. What forms it? Recent corporate sponsorships? Their fear of standing up in court on principle because it would cost them money should they lose?
 
Dan's post on banned devices and gimmicks, makes me think they only pick fights with those companies who can't afford to fight them. 

[RSLivingston_III]

Ralph:

The Rangefinders approved for tournament play do not give you elevation.   Nor wind or the slope of the green.   

As for the architecture, there is no difference in knowing your distances.  You still are distracted by water, or any other hazard.  If you don't know the distance you're less likely to go for a shot so you might just lay up with your tail between your legs. 

They give absolute distances to the pin and the better players fire away without second thoughts. Given time, they will add measurements for the other factors soon and then NO thinking will be required. The game is slipping away little bits at a time.

By the way, I play only hickory clubs and have done so for the last decade, so es I am one of those traditionalists.
I haven't been on much and wanted to clarify that for the newbies that don't know me.

[Tony Ristola]

Dan writes:
Tony Ristola writes:
Paul and other anti-Toy proponents,

Where do you put caddies in this equation then?
They offer more input than just yardage.

Hypothetical: On a course you haven't played, you're in a match... one guy has a caddy, the other a yardage guide... you're playing to "win"; what's the difference between the two?

Just curious.

I want the slippery slope to end.

We keep getting all these gadgets because your side says you allow this, therefore you must allow that. You even use the claim that all these various gadgets and tools will speed up play. We were told years ago buggies, yardage books, yardage on sprinklers, 150 yard stakes, signage, etc... will speed up play. You fooled some of us before. But I'm really not as stupid as I look. These gadgets, just like all the other improvements will slow down the game.


Adam writes:
Tony, You must've misunderstood me.
You seem to be stuck on the caddy question.
I am not against caddies.
I'm not interested in winning at golf. That's impossible. Pro Tournament play is not golf, and, as Dan has clearly articulated, it is a major cause for the deplorable speed at which many play.

I've golfed with Dan on a MOnday at SFGC. It was caddy day. There was one hanging around the first tee looking for a job. Dan hired him on the spot. I leaned on him only for yardages from the center of the fairways, but not until I had told him my guess. It was a great way to learn Tillie's tricks in deceiving the eye.

This thread is about devices, equating them to caddies is insulting to caddies.
JK is the only one allowed to be insulting, here.  Wink

END

Now, it's rare for me to disagree with you two, but here I will.

I am stuck on the use of caddies question. Because the provide more assistance than a yardage guide or laser. So:

Caddies are aids. Yes they are human, and to err is human, but a good caddy is a human yardage guide, clubbing guide (something a yardage guide won't offer, and something you'd get a penalty for if asking a playing partner) with an abundance of interactive features to plug into. Think a good caddy at Broadmoor wouldn't save you a bunch of strokes around the greens... accelerate the learning curve? In this vein, anyone playing with a good caddy on an unfamiliar course can club you at key moments where there is blindness, sufficient elevations changes, and around the greens. They know the hidden secrets, and will unlock them for you. 

Yardage guides and aids only give a distance. They can't account for elevation changes or how local conditions will play on the shot at hand.

Yardage guides and distance assistance are cheap deaf-mute caddies.

So... if you are for the elimination of assistance, caddies must also be thrown out. They began this slippery slope... of instant information accumulation.

Adam: Why even ask for the yardages at SFGC? You denied yourself all the joy of being deceived during that round and the following round. Why even take a caddy?

[Mike McGuire]

This device is awesome. Points to down hill and gives you the degrees. Put it over the hole and you know right away what door the ball should enter. Saves a lot of time reading the green. We think its unfair - and slows down play - to place  it halfway to the hole.


Click for full size - Uploaded with plasq's Skitch

[Sean_A]

Melvyn, what kind of driver do you use? Persimmon, hickory shaft? You wouldn't be using a modern one with a massive head and graphite shaft that goes 60 yards further than those I just mentioned?

If so why would you complain about people using range finders?

Artificial aid? The range finder doesn't hit the damn ball does it. The biggest artificial aids of all are the clubs and the ball. I suppose you're still using balatas are you?

Dean has nailed this one on the head.  If all you "traditionalists" are so passionate about your cause, why not go all out!  Quit half assing your traditionalist beliefs and just go for it man.  Pick up some hickories (maybe some featheries even), find a course with no irrigation or modern maintenance practices, and you guys can have yourself a ball.  Perhaps you could all travel there by horse and buggy (or bike if you choose).     

Paul

I don't consider myself a proper traditionalist.  I don't care how good the clubs and balls are.  To me, it doesn't matter.  What matters is how folks react to the equipment and what happens to golf courses due to their reaction.  Personally, I think its all smoke and mirrors.  Courses have been changing since they were built.  Folks can't resist changing stuff - its in their nature - so I think we would be seeing the current changes whether or not the ball flies 10% less or whatever.  My solution has long been to reduce the number of clubs in the bag to something like 8 or 9.  This doesn't mean we won't see some bomber golf, but it does mean we would see interesting golf played.  I want to see guys hit creative shots and have to think about where they may end up if they try to rip a 325 yard drive because they may not have the tool to get them out of jail if things go wrong.  I couldn't care less if guys shoot 65 so long as its entertaining.  Give a pro 8 clubs on a f&f course and I guarantee you will see some cool shotmaking or that pro won't be making money.  I think its a myth that current pros aren't shotmakers.  Of course they are, they just aren't required to be shotmakers in the current climate. 

However, I do draw the line of technology at using electronic machines which help the player make decisions.  I wouldn't mind if all markers were taken away including on the tee box even though I use them if I walk past one.  In all honesty, I would include caddies as well.  I don't believe they should be allowed to act as a team with the player in decision making.  Most folks would disagree with me, but I think a good caddie can make a big difference compared to a not so good caddie.  If caddies are partners then they should get their names on cups as well.  I would rather just see  golfers against golfers. 

Ciao

[Paul Saathoff]

Sean,

I obviously don't consider myself a traditionalist, but have never owned a rangefinder or GPS system and usually only look for the 200, 150, 100 yard markers to gauge my distance and club selection. 

I guess the problem I have is with people saying that yardage markers, GPS, or color coded flags go against some ancient code of golf (even though most here are pro caddy use, which makes no sense in their argument) and should be aboloshed and those that enjoy the security of knowing yardages aren't properly enjoying the game.  Isn't hitting good golf shots part of the thrill and enjoyment of the game.  If knowing the specific yardage aids Joe Blow to hit a good shot, let him know the damn yardage.  If having the latest Nike Sasquatch whatever helps him hit a better drive, let him use the damn thing.  If people are enjoying the game, then its good for golf (especially with the dwindling number of players each year).  Now I'm not saying these technological aids (or advancements in clubs) are needed to enjoy the game.  But if these things add to the enjoyment of ones game, I just don't see a problem.  I have several golfing buddies that seem to play golf just for the thrill of purchasing equipment, switching clubs constantly in the ever search for the "one" driver or "one" putter that is going to make their game (I'm at fault on this one as well).  If they enjoy doing this and it adds to their enjoyment of the game, what's the big problem.

I like my broccolli steamed, topped with cheddar cheese, you like yours cold and fresh.  Big deal. Just don't tell me that the best and only way to eat broccolli is your way.  In the end we are both buying broccolli, supporting our local (?) broccolli farmers, and enjoying the great taste of a great vegetable.         

[Sean_A]

Sean,

I obviously don't consider myself a traditionalist, but have never owned a rangefinder or GPS system and usually only look for the 200, 150, 100 yard markers to gauge my distance and club selection. 

I guess the problem I have is with people saying that yardage markers, GPS, or color coded flags go against some ancient code of golf (even though most here are pro caddy use, which makes no sense in their argument) and should be aboloshed and those that enjoy the security of knowing yardages aren't properly enjoying the game.  Isn't hitting good golf shots part of the thrill and enjoyment of the game.  If knowing the specific yardage aids Joe Blow to hit a good shot, let him know the damn yardage.  If having the latest Nike Sasquatch whatever helps him hit a better drive, let him use the damn thing.  If people are enjoying the game, then its good for golf (especially with the dwindling number of players each year).  Now I'm not saying these technological aids (or advancements in clubs) are needed to enjoy the game.  But if these things add to the enjoyment of ones game, I just don't see a problem.  I have several golfing buddies that seem to play golf just for the thrill of purchasing equipment, switching clubs constantly in the ever search for the "one" driver or "one" putter that is going to make their game (I'm at fault on this one as well).  If they enjoy doing this and it adds to their enjoyment of the game, what's the big problem.

I like my broccolli steamed, topped with cheddar cheese, you like yours cold and fresh.  Big deal. Just don't tell me that the best and only way to eat broccolli is your way.  In the end we are both buying broccolli, supporting our local (?) broccolli farmers, and enjoying the great taste of a great vegetable.         

Paul

As I said before, I don't care if you or anybody wants to use a caddie or a machine or a cart or whatever to help you.  If it floats yer boat then do it - its no skin off my nose.  I feel exactly the same about the pro game.  I don't care what they do - in fact I don't consider it my business because I don't support the pro game other than to watch a few events a year.  My thoughts are more toward what I WOULD CONSIDER AN IDEAL SITUATION and what happens to golf courses due to the reaction (or should I say complete over-reaction) of the use of these thingydojobs - including better sticks and balls. 

Ciao   

[JWinick]

To expand on the inconsistency of the pro-caddy, anti-range finder view, let's consider a tournament I played in recently.   The tournament, like most tournaments allows the use of range finders, caddies, GPS devices, etc.   

We were assigned caddies.   I received a 12-year old who literally could not carry my bag.  He couldn't read the greens.   He didn't help me look for my ball.  He lost a club.   His cell phone rang three times and he answered it twice.   I felt bad for the kid, but I should have sent him home.   Later that day, a complaint from a competitor got him fired. 

In this situation, I was at a huge disadvantage.   The other two players had great caddies, "honor" caddies.   Was this fair?   What if we didn't have a range finder and I relied on my caddy to give me distances to the pin?   

I didn't complain, and I took my lumps like a man.   I had been playing poorly so I don't think my caddy situation was the difference between success and failure.  But, it's hard to argue that we had an equal situation.

Caddies were assigned randomly for the tournament.   To me, it would be much fairer to play a tournament without caddies and give each player a range finder.  Yes, I know we love walking with a caddy and we don't want to ruin a profession.   But, a range finder gives each participant the same information.   You're on your own on reading the greens, judging the wind, club selection, etc.

The reason a player like Tiger Woods doesn't want Range finders is pure self-interest.  He feels like he has one of the best relationships with a caddy in the world and he has a vested interest in keeping the game exactly as it is now.   

Self-preservation also helps explain the pro-caddy, anti-range finder view.   If we all use range finders, does that infringe upon the need of a caddy and hurt the caddy program?   I've got no problem walking and carrying my own bag.   At our club, most caddies have range finders anyway so they've adopted to the times.

[John Kavanaugh]

JW,

I would take a push cart with GPS everyday over a caddie if the game was all about me.  I've got a date with a caddie in a couple of hours who I consider a friend.  He won't read a putt and rarely give me a yardage, I know the course better than him, and I doubt that we will exchange more than half a dozen quips in what will be close to 5 hours including range time.  I don't have a choice if I am going to walk.  I'm too fat too carry my own and the course does not allow push carts.  Thank God and government for rules that force us to be better people.  The caddie/amateur relationship is a rare bi-charitable event.  We both give more to the action than we receive and come out the better for the experience. 

[Dan Herrmann]

I'm being facetious here...  But should we forgo the use of the wooden tee?  Wasn't that designed to speed up the game due to the lack of need to build your own mound of sand from which you'd hit your drive?  To me, it's a similar thing.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()