[Reef Wilson]

I might regret jumping in here, but it seems to me that this really comes down to a discussion between 2 groups

1) the pro-knowing-your-exact-yardage crowd

2) the anti-technology-on-the-golf-course crowd

Group 1 seems to agree that using technology for anything beyond yardage (elevation, reading greens) should not be allowed, but can't seem to explain exactly why. They can't understand why the other group thinks technology on the course is bad yet equipment created with technology is OK.

Group 2 seems to think there is a difference between a caddy telling you your yardage and a machine telling you but can't seem to explain exactly how it is different. They can't understand how the other group can think they are honoring the roots of the game while using technology to tell them how far they need to hit the ball.


Or something like that.

As a typical gemini I see it from both sides. I am very anti cheater line and yet have a GPS but don't use it all the time. I am very impressed that there seem to be people out there who play entire rounds of golf by eyeballing distances only. I imagine having a good round that way is very satisfying!

Reef

[Brent Hutto]

Yeah, Reef. Imagine if you could shoot a 74 using a only a hickory-shafted mashie-niblick, a brass putter and a gutta-percha ball. That would be a very satisfying accomplishment indeed.

[John Kavanaugh]

We are not trying to protect the game from what it is today, we are trying to keep it from being what it will be tomorrow.

[JohnV]

Group 1 seems to agree that using technology for anything beyond yardage (elevation, reading greens) should not be allowed, but can't seem to explain exactly why. They can't understand why the other group thinks technology on the course is bad yet equipment created with technology is OK.

Reef,
I know I'll regret jumping in here.  Traditionally yardage has been available through many means including caddies, home made yardage books, yardage books sold at a course, measured sprinkler heads etc.  Decision 14-3/5 which says it is ok to use yardage books says in part, "its use has been tradtionally accepted".   The Distance Measuring Devices are looked at as a logical extension of the yardage book, but even then, they can only be used by local rule. 

Other equipment for measuring wind speed, elevation or green slopes have not been traditionally available for use which is why they are not allowed.

[Bill Satterfield]

I LOVE my range finder.  It is quick, effective, accurate, and whenever I play with different golfers they enjoy having me stop by their ball, laser the distance, and give them a number.  Knowing the correct yardage is such a critical part of playing golf that it is for me to understand the philosophy of being so against it.

[John Kavanaugh]

...and whenever I play with different golfers they enjoy having me stop by their ball, laser the distance, and give them a number...

What do you mean by "different golfers"?  Have your regular playing partners already started waving you off?

[Bill Satterfield]

...and whenever I play with different golfers they enjoy having me stop by their ball, laser the distance, and give them a number...

What do you mean by "different golfers"?  Have your regular playing partners already started waving you off?

The regular golfers I play with have their own range finders or GPS.

[John Kavanaugh]

Carts or push carts?

[John Kavanaugh]

I think we can all agree that social acceptance of vibrators and Viagra have hurt the nuance of marital romance and helped lead to higher divorce rates or less satisfying interpersonal relationships with our mates.  The can't miss orgasm is much like the can't miss distance.  It's all good but not quite all there.  Sex has always led changes in society and technological advances.  The following article makes many interesting points both for and against the use of technology to make our lives simpler and more sastisfying on some level:  http://slashdot.org/features/99/03/09/1544207.shtml

[Melvyn Morrow]

Reef

I am certainly not in Group One nor actually in Group Two

I am not against technology at all, what I do feel IMHO is wrong is the NEED to know distances either from a Caddie, Range Finder of Yardage books.

What I have been saying and most do not seem to understand is that we as golfers do not need this information. Yardage has become a crutch, a must know, yet if we use our own God given eyes and brain we can work it out ourselves. So you know your distance but how many Golfers have the skill to achieve the shot time after time after time even in perfect conditions.
The day 99.9% of Golfers can hit 150 yard shot to that exact spot in any condition, then I agree they may be useful. 

I am happy to use technology in developing the ball or club, but I have never seen the need to have something tell me the yardage.

I honestly believe it speaks volumes about your game of golf, it clearly states that you can’t judge distance, you need something or one to help you – but in reality you don’t.

As for caddies, I am happy to see them on our courses, but I do not feel they should offer any type of advice to a golfer when they are playing in a competition. A Caddie if requested should be allowed to give advice on a course to Visitors who are out for an enjoyable day of golf.

In my life I have seen some course become no walking course, I am watching and reading about young and old golfers alike promoting artificial aids because they  - are great, make a difference, speed up the game – but between carts and artificial aids I see the golfer slowly given up on the real game as it has been played for centuries, because its cool.

Make a stand, play golf the natural way, otherwise when you get old in 20-30 years time you will be fighting but next time it might be to keep the golf course due to high cost of land, construction cost going through the roof because of environmental issues i.e. cost of water. The game may be transferred to your large High Definition screens in the bars at the club house. The current Keepers of the Green being promoted to bar staff as no course left to maintain.

Whatever future golf has it may be determined by our actions today, so I just ask you to think seriously of the consequences of either going alone with the crowd or sticking your head in the sand.

Some may joke about traditionalists, others may mention Hickory clubs with gutty balls, many may not even care, but thats OK because I care and I know there are many on this site who agree with me.

[A.G._Crockett]

How do any of you people ever know when to lay off the gas and start braking for stopped cars on a highway without the precise distance to the cars in front of you?

Not your best effort at an analogy, Shivas.

In fact, as far as analogies go, we don't even have to leave the golf course, do we?  Isn't the caddie analogy enough?  And it doesn't even matter whether the caddy is an old Scottish guy who hands you a mashie because he has caddied there for 25 years, or a guy in Chicago who uses a yardage book.  It is still an outside way to determine what club to use, and it has been part of golf from the very beginning.  To claim otherwise is just silly.

A general priniciple in rule making, from sports to law, is to treat like situations alike.  From caddies to yardage books to 150 markers to yardage marked on sprinkler heads to lasers and GPS; it is pretty much all the same, and to claim otherwise just sounds like grumpy old men. 

Move on, boys, move on.

[Patrick_Mucci]

It's yet another example of removing any of the mental part of the game, attempting to make the game only about the shots.

It's another attempt to make an inherently unfair game fair.

It's another example of the Americanization of golf:

If a pro gets yardage, then I'm entitled to yardage;

If my opponent gets a good lie in the fairway, then I should also;

If I hit as good of a shot as my playing partner, then I shouldn't end up in a blind bunker.

It's all part of making a beautiful game ugly.

Cheers,
Dan "The Luddite" King

b]

Dan,

I agree.

I'd add that it's an indirect attempt to "buy" a game.

To let hi-tech replace inate skill, mental and/or physical.[/b]

[Bill_McBride]

Sean:  didn't it occur to you that I classify you as "nobody."   


Besides, I was talking about a hand-crafted line, not using the logo.

What about the printed line Titleist is putting on the Pro V1?

[Cliff Hamm]

I'd add that it's an indirect attempt to "buy" a game.

To let hi-tech replace inate skill, mental and/or physical.[/b]

Isn't it all about "buying a game" from golf balls to clubs to high tech tees to whatever?  It's simply a matter of where you choose to draw the line.

[Bill_McBride]

I think we can all agree that social acceptance of vibrators and Viagra have hurt the nuance of marital romance and helped lead to higher divorce rates or less satisfying interpersonal relationships with our mates.  The can't miss orgasm is much like the can't miss distance.  It's all good but not quite all there.  Sex has always led changes in society and technological advances.  The following article makes many interesting points both for and against the use of technology to make our lives simpler and more sastisfying on some level:  http://slashdot.org/features/99/03/09/1544207.shtml

JK, sometimes you are one weird dude.  Sexbots?   

[Mike Kosak]

I was up playing in Truckee the past two days.  An individual pulled out his range finder 10 feet off the putting surface!!  I didn't know they measured feet.  Give me the 150 yard bush and I'll figure it out from there...my opinion...correct yardage for the average golfer has had the biggest impact on pace of play over the past 20 years.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Cliff Hamm,

Yes, and unfortunately the USGA has misjudged the line .

Initially they limited oversized clubheads then buckled.

Now tennis racket sized club heads are in vogue.

There's been a concession to the lowest common denominator in order to attract golfers who will have the affect of further lowering the lowest common denominator.  It's a downward spiral from which the game will not recover.

Who would think that Al Czervik's putter would be deemed conforming ?  

[Cliff Hamm]

Pat...As far as the game not recovering for the purists you're absolutely right.  However,. we all know the declining numbers.  Golf is plain and simple difficult.  Therefore the easier you make the game the more it attracts people to play.  Whether that's what you want is open to debate.  The USGA in their recent ruling on grooves set 3 categories I believe:   Pros, top amateurs and the rest of us.   I believe that is wise. 

[Dan King]

John Kavanaugh writes:
I think we can all agree that social acceptance of vibrators and Viagra have hurt the nuance of marital romance and helped lead to higher divorce rates or less satisfying interpersonal relationships with our mates.

I'm a Luddite with GPS and golf, but I love my Viagra. Still, a word of caution: Just as GPS and golf do not mix, neither does Viagra and golf.

The following article makes many interesting points both for and against the use of technology to make our lives simpler and more sastisfying on some level:

Here's to hoping it doesn't take as long to get my sex-bot as it has taken to get my rocket-pack I was promised 40 years ago.

Cheers,
Dan King

I like men who have a future and women who have a past.
 --Oscar Wilde

[Bruce Leland]

Besides, I was talking about a hand-crafted line, not using the logo.

What the hell is the difference and that is exactly my point in asking the "old time" tournament players such as John K  if they used the Titleist script to line up their ball prior to Acushnet adding the alignment aid that 98% of golfers playing their Pro V1 were adding to the ball with a sharpie. 

I don't think it makes one single bit of difference, an alignment aid is an alignment aid whether it  is a bold straight line with >'s on each end or it is a perfectly aligned logo script.  If your argument is that it is a breach of the rules to ADD the line with a sharpie then clearly you didn't invest in sharpie stock when it became popular(tongue firmly placed in cheek)

[JWinick]

I think you summed it up well.   My main beef with the anti-technologists is the fact that: they subtly accuse us of cheating; their moral superiority; their intent to stop our fun (we are "pro-choice" if you will); and the denigration of the need to know.

Meylvn, you keep saying its irrelevant how far you are from the pin.  I'm sorry, but I don't know how you become a stronger player without controlling your distance with your irons.

I might regret jumping in here, but it seems to me that this really comes down to a discussion between 2 groups

1) the pro-knowing-your-exact-yardage crowd

2) the anti-technology-on-the-golf-course crowd

Group 1 seems to agree that using technology for anything beyond yardage (elevation, reading greens) should not be allowed, but can't seem to explain exactly why. They can't understand why the other group thinks technology on the course is bad yet equipment created with technology is OK.

Group 2 seems to think there is a difference between a caddy telling you your yardage and a machine telling you but can't seem to explain exactly how it is different. They can't understand how the other group can think they are honoring the roots of the game while using technology to tell them how far they need to hit the ball.


Or something like that.

As a typical gemini I see it from both sides. I am very anti cheater line and yet have a GPS but don't use it all the time. I am very impressed that there seem to be people out there who play entire rounds of golf by eyeballing distances only. I imagine having a good round that way is very satisfying!

Reef

[JWinick]

The USGA just took action on club groves to make it more difficult to hit the ball out of the rough.   So, the argument that allowing range finders begets Al Czervik's putter is preposterous.   

Cliff Hamm,

Yes, and unfortunately the USGA has misjudged the line .

Initially they limited oversized clubheads then buckled.

Now tennis racket sized club heads are in vogue.

There's been a concession to the lowest common denominator in order to attract golfers who will have the affect of further lowering the lowest common denominator.  It's a downward spiral from which the game will not recover.

Who would think that Al Czervik's putter would be deemed conforming ?  

[Melvyn Morrow]

Jon

“Melvyn, you keep saying its irrelevant how far you are from the pin.  I'm sorry, but I don't know how you become a stronger player without controlling your distance with your irons”.



I don’t remember saying that – what I thought I said was that we each have it within ourselves to judge distance and do not need artificial aids either from a Caddie, yardage books or electronic toy.

So you have a box of tricks that tells you that it’s a 140 yard shot, now are you telling me that your computer mind can absorb that exact distance just because it came from a Caddie or gadget. But your brain has been unable to judge the distance – if so, how in hells name can you take the shot.

What I am saying is you just do not need outside information, it is already within you – these devices plus info from caddies are just crutches. Have confidence in your own ability or are have you become one of those Lemmings (perhaps I should say sheep as we are talking about golf) and following everyone else just because they have one.  

Call me old fashion, a relic from the old days, anti technology freak, spoiler
of fun – I don’t actually care because I don’t need help with my game (well perhaps at my age with joint & back pain I do but not from a toy or book etc).

As Shivas mentioned how can you judge stopping distance in your car, do you quickly grab the RF and take a fast reading or just use your brain/eye
co-ordination?

You don’t need outside information on length, yardage because you already know it as you Walk to your ball.  

I’m not trying to spoil your fun, I’m trying to give you more inner confidence in your own abilities to judge and absorb all the information around you. The more you rely on these things the more addicted you become, soon you may find that you will not be able to play without them.

All is not right or fair in golf and our governing bodies are not actually helping.

[Rich Goodale]

I'm currently at work developing a GPS-sensitive thermoplastic which if painted in a straight line on a golf ball can give exact readings as to both line and length of all shots, including putts.  I'll be sending a beta-version to Shivas for testing.

[Reef Wilson]

Melvyn,

Regarding the need to know a yardage. So, you do not look at the length of a par 3 on the score card at a course you have never played before? Do you not know what distance some of your clubs usually hit the ball? I am not trying to be snarky, I just want to know more about a way of playing the game with which I am not familiar.

When playing one's home course it is common that you would know the course well enough that from a particular spot you usually hit a 7 iron. Is this the same or different from knowing the yardage at a course you are not familiar with? In this case it seems that your previous knowledge is taking the place of a caddy or other yardage aid. Is this OK?

Shivas,

regarding the braking in a car analogy: braking is a gradual process, not like a golf shot which is a one off decision you make and then execute hoping you are correct and with no means of adjusting your decision mid way. And with braking, the consequences are dire. It's not just a game. Being short is the only option. Being long means injury or death.

Reef

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()