[Jason Topp]

After spending the last four days here -

   http://www.nphnicaragua.org/

 - I find it a little difficult to get too excited about range-finders.  


Of course - this could be said about all GCA topics.  Nonetheless, I participate daily.

[PCCraig]

In the dead of night I will watch the continental plates move further and further apart and wonder if in time we will meet again on a natural contoured golf course close by the sea.

Just make sure you don't estimate the distance between the two.

[RSLivingston_III]

Tom,
OK, I see why I missed it. No real question. I guess I am too busy trying to understand the "how could they not be interested in walking off there yardage" statements. And how they keep ignoring the information I give them.
Let alone the "you can't possibly be playing by feel alone" statements. Will it mean anything if I add that I have won events in Scotland and there was no distance graffiti? (I like that term too.)

But to get back on track, I guess haven't read any treads where Melvin was forcing his perspective on anyone. I have only seen him state it and people call him an ass for believing in such a thing because they have no experience with it.
I do only get on here occasionally because of my health thing so have probably missed much.

[Tom Huckaby]

Tom,
OK, I see why I missed it. No real question. I guess I am too busy trying to understand the "how could they not be interested in walking off there yardage" statements. And how they keep ignoring the information I give them.
Let alone the "you can't possibly be playing by feel alone" statements. Will it mean anything if I add that I have won events in Scotland and there was no distance graffiti? (I like that term too.)

But to get back on track, I guess haven't read any treads where Melvin was forcing his perspective on anyone. I have only seen him state it and people call him an ass for believing in such a thing because they have no experience with it.
I do only get on here occasionally because of my health thing so have probably missed much.

Understood. Ralph.

Please trust me, and believe me, that you have sincerely misjudged the participants here.

All the best to you.

[Kalen Braley]

Melyvn,

I don't think that everyone is "yardage" biased, but I do think they are distance oriented yes.  There has been a lot of studies on this and how the male brain works in how it sizes up distances thru common units of measurements in whatever forms they come in.

I'm not trying to tear down your ancestors...I am rather thankful on the contrary for thier early involvement in forming the game.  However I think its naive to think that they were interested in distance, just like 99% of golfers today are.  Especially given the fact that they were so good at the game, they must have been keenly aware of distances and used it to thier advantage.

The truth does indeed exist...I just don't think we'll ever find it without inventing a time machine and outfitting Tom H in old wool clothes and hickories and sending him back to be a spy on our behalf.   

I do think this is an interesting topic even though it doesn't change anything.  As Tom always says, the Genie is indeed out of that bottle and it ain't going back in.  So anything that happened 150 years quite frankly doesn't matter....but its still fun to argue/haggle/speculate on it though.

[RSLivingston_III]

Ralph:

Absolute statements are rarely true.  I read most long posts if they are of interest to me.  I accept historical facts too.

And I'd also appreciate a response to my post, directed to you.  You can make it off-line if you wish.

I just believe you have quite misjudged at least some of the characters in this drama.

 

LATE EDIT:  here am I Don Quixote..... yes Ralph, it likely never will be resolved.  Still, a fair judgment of the characters might be a bit nicer. 

Tom,
I can't seen to find a question directed at me from you. Could you repost?

Pat,
You have never "played" hickories. You have hit some balls around with some crappy old clubs. As far as I know, Ran is the only one on the site that has played hickories. Tom might have, but I don't know how many rounds he has under his belt.

Ralph-

What makes you so darn "pig-headed" is the fact that you really 100% believe that I never "played" hickories. That is an insane statement and in no way should you make that assumption.

Yes, Sir Ralph, I have PLAYED hickories.

TCC-Brookline owns two full sets (maybe 10-11 clubs, not an old crap set, but purchased that year) and one day while playing 36 holes of golf one of the Assistants let me take a set out for a round. As I stated before I didn't find them all that difficult after an adjustment period of 2 or 3 holes. I probably shot 6 strokes higher than I usually would have.

Ralph- In no way, shape, or form am I trying to disagree with anyone on here. But I HATE when people believe they know the secret to "pure" and "traditional" golf and somehow every normal golfer is some sort of virus. Give me a break.

Games and sports change. Period. Try going to the NBA and saying you want the three point line removed because that is not "traditional" basketball. Try telling football players to play with leather helmits. Baseball players to not use steriods. And hockey players to only play pond hockey.

Like I said, you didn't play hickories. You played a set of reproductions that might as well have been a new set of pings.
I am glad you acknowledge that games change, so where is the difficulty in understanding that they played by feel? Using your analogy, the statements in this thread have been argueing there is no way they didn't know about a three point line 150 years ago.

[Craig Sweet]

Ralph...

Distance is such a part of the game...how did Old/Young Tom Morris design a course if he did not understand distance?  Did he simply "feel" that a bunker was in the proper location to produce a challenge or did he do some pacing?

[Craig Sweet]

Melvyn....there is a big difference between playing the game with distance aids and knowing how far you hit a certain club...maybe I am reading you wrong, but you appear to be saying they did not care to know how far they hit a certain club back then....obviously each time they hit  a club it went a different distance, but never the less, they had a maximum distance, and surely early golfers must have known this?

[PCCraig]

Ralph:

Absolute statements are rarely true.  I read most long posts if they are of interest to me.  I accept historical facts too.

And I'd also appreciate a response to my post, directed to you.  You can make it off-line if you wish.

I just believe you have quite misjudged at least some of the characters in this drama.

 

LATE EDIT:  here am I Don Quixote..... yes Ralph, it likely never will be resolved.  Still, a fair judgment of the characters might be a bit nicer. 

Tom,
I can't seen to find a question directed at me from you. Could you repost?

Pat,
You have never "played" hickories. You have hit some balls around with some crappy old clubs. As far as I know, Ran is the only one on the site that has played hickories. Tom might have, but I don't know how many rounds he has under his belt.

Ralph-

What makes you so darn "pig-headed" is the fact that you really 100% believe that I never "played" hickories. That is an insane statement and in no way should you make that assumption.

Yes, Sir Ralph, I have PLAYED hickories.

TCC-Brookline owns two full sets (maybe 10-11 clubs, not an old crap set, but purchased that year) and one day while playing 36 holes of golf one of the Assistants let me take a set out for a round. As I stated before I didn't find them all that difficult after an adjustment period of 2 or 3 holes. I probably shot 6 strokes higher than I usually would have.

Ralph- In no way, shape, or form am I trying to disagree with anyone on here. But I HATE when people believe they know the secret to "pure" and "traditional" golf and somehow every normal golfer is some sort of virus. Give me a break.

Games and sports change. Period. Try going to the NBA and saying you want the three point line removed because that is not "traditional" basketball. Try telling football players to play with leather helmits. Baseball players to not use steriods. And hockey players to only play pond hockey.

Like I said, you didn't play hickories. You played a set of reproductions that might as well have been a new set of pings.
I am glad you acknowledge that games change, so where is the difficulty in understanding that they played by feel? Using your analogy, this the statements in this thread have been argueing there is no way they didn't know about a three point line 150 years ago.

Let me know where I can sign up to be a member of the American Association of Mindless Hickory Players .

[RSLivingston_III]

I guess the Bombsquad guys have taken over....

[Craig Sweet]

Ralph..

Actually, the game is still played by "feel".....you can use all the distance aids in the world, but all they do is tell you where you are...not how hard or soft to hit a shot, not where to land the ball, not what club to use....that is all FEEL.

For you to sit on your high horse and claim the game is so much different than it was 150 years ago is asinine and wrong!

[Joe Hancock]

For you to sit on your high horse and claim the game is so much different than it was 150 years ago is asinine and wrong!

Beautiful.....truly.

Joe

p.s. Craig, how old are you again?

[Craig Sweet]

Joe...

Equipment changes...the hole hasn't and the object of the game hasn't.

Get over it...stop being so wrapped up in the material...embrace the spirit(ual)!!!

[Tom Huckaby]

Let me know where I can sign up to be a member of the American Association of Mindless Hickory Players .

Patrick: under-informed, cocksure certitude such as this (particularly, as packaged with pointless ad hominems) is utterly unimpressive.  You are doing a great disservice to yourself.  You haven't been around long enough to be able to get away with pretending to know everything yet...

Yes, that role is reserved to this DSchmidt character, whoever the hell he is.
 

[PCCraig]

Let me know where I can sign up to be a member of the American Association of Mindless Hickory Players .

Patrick: under-informed, cocksure certitude such as this (particularly, as packaged with pointless ad hominems) is utterly unimpressive.  You are doing a great disservice to yourself.  You haven't been around long enough to be able to get away with pretending to know everything yet...

The only "cocksure certitude" is the additude I get from Melvyn and Ralph. If anyone has actually read my posts would know I am essentially on their side. However their bullheaded and condenscending stance on all things "pure" golf is stupid.

I have "been around" for five years. Apparently unless you have 15,000 posts are you allowed to state a strong opinion about something.

[Charlie Goerges]

Man, is this thread still going?

[Tom Huckaby]

Charlie - it is indeed - we have plenty of Quixotes here as well as others who for whatever reason find this fun.  I myself seem to qualify as both.

BUT... in discussions with a wise man... a light bulb has gone on over my head.  OK, he pulled the switch.

WHAT IF.....

The USGA and R&A each got together and made rules changes such that distance information was effectively banned?

The mechanics of this can be fleshed out by others (it's not my forte, that's for sure).  I think if you told courses that if they had distance markings (other than on scorecard only, one distance per hole), they could not be rated - and modified the advice rule such that distance information could not be given - that would do the trick.  There would be a large backlash for sure.  However, if the governing bodies stood firm.... people would adapt.

Then we'd add back in this skill - judging of distance, what club to hit - that I have to believe is fundamental to the game.  The game would be more fun.  The erosion of at least this judgment skill would cease.

Now if Melvyn reads this, he is likely keeling over in shock right now, given the assumptions he's made about me (incorrectly).  But my position all along has never been that use of distance information is the right way, or a better way, to play this game.  No, my position has always been that it is how the game is played today, it's not going to change, so live and let live, go with the flow, judge not lest ye be judged.

BUT HMMMMMMM.... if it could change - and I do think this could work.... man I believe the game would be better for it, in several ways.

Thoughts?

TH

[Rich Goodale]

The only time I have ever seen significant use of range finders was last year in BUDA VI at Lundin and Elie.  All "culprits" that I played with were visiting Americans and in all cases their use of the devices was so unobtrusive and so irrelevant to the speed of play as to hardly be noticed (if anything it speeded things up).  Old Tom would have liked that, IMHO.

[Richard Boult]

Tom, I for one would love to see it.

What people (particularly grasshoppers whose adult life experience began well into the 21st century) tend to forget is that long before the now-faddish educational device called the "open book test" -- which comes complete with permitted calculator and computer and sometimes they even give you the questions in advance -- there was this thing they used to use that was called the closed book test, where it was just you, your brain and your writing instrument, the questions were a surprise and you had to do the best your could using only your recollections of your learning and experience. 

In fact, they didn't even call it a closed book test back then.  It was simply called a test.  The fact that it was "closed book" was a given. 

Similarly, there was once something simply called Golf - where it was just you, your judgment and your experience.  Now, with courses that are littered with distance graffiti, pin sheets abounding, players carrying detailed yardage maps in fancy little leather booklets, every distance zapped electronically, caddies standing behind players to line them up, cheater lines on the putter and cheater lines on the ball, make no mistake:  we are playing "open book golf".

And the average score for both test types is still a "C" (90).

[PCCraig]

Tom, I for one would love to see it.

What people (particularly grasshoppers whose adult life experience began well into the 21st century) tend to forget is that long before the now-faddish educational device called the "open book test" -- which comes complete with permitted calculator and computer and sometimes they even give you the questions in advance -- there was this thing they used to use that was called the closed book test, where it was just you, your brain and your writing instrument, the questions were a surprise and you had to do the best your could using only your recollections of your learning and experience. 

In fact, they didn't even call it a closed book test back then.  It was simply called a test.  Similarly, there was once something simply called Golf - where it was just you, your judgment and your experience.  Now, with courses that are littered with distance graffiti, pin sheets abounding, players carrying detailed yardage maps in fancy little leather booklets, every distance zapped electronically, caddies standing behind players to line them up, cheater lines on the putter and cheater lines on the ball, make no mistake:  we are playing "open book golf".

There is no such thing as "open book golf." That is completely ridiculous. Maybe a select few golfers are using a wide range of devices to zap yardages and line up putts, but all of us generally do not. You're idea of closed book golf would mean that unless we are playing golf exactly like Ralph and his old hickory clubs (but not new ones because that would be like using pings     ) we are not really playing golf?

I would suggest calling your closed book game "Hickory Golf" and everyone else can call what they play "Golf."

But what do I know considering I have less than 10,000 posts, a grasshopper, and someone who was educated and raised in a far off land (oh wait).

[Tom Huckaby]

The only time I have ever seen significant use of range finders was last year in BUDA VI at Lundin and Elie.  All "culprits" that I played with were visiting Americans and in all cases their use of the devices was so unobtrusive and so irrelevant to the speed of play as to hardly be noticed (if anything it speeded things up).  Old Tom would have liked that, IMHO.

Rich - oh I fully concur with that - that's been another point of mine all along - that use of these devices is either irrelevant in terms of speed of play or in rare instances (like over here in distance graffiti world) does tend to speed things up.  Whether Old Tom would have liked it is a historical footnote, no comment from me, I don't know.

But what about the world today and what we do now?  Any thoughts on the idea to remove all distance information?  Can it be done?  Should it be done?  I kinda like Dave's "closed book test" thought process....

TH

[Tom Huckaby]

Pat:

Your post is the backlash I'd expect if the rules-makers changed things as per what I posted.

Many would be up in arms... many would scream... legal implications would have to be considered (sadly)....

But try to look beyond that.

Picture a golf world with no distance information.  No one would have it, none at all.  The skill in judging just what club to hit on any given shot would be fundamental.

Wouldn't this be more fun?  Wouldn't it re-introduce a complexity and skill to the game that would be just one more way to separate the great players from the poorer?  Wouldn't it add more shotmaking to a game some complain has gotten too easy?  Wouldn't it lead to greater chances being taken in architecture... wilder holes being built...

I don't know.  Maybe I am reaching too far.  Heck I've been a slave to distance my entire golf life and it would be one hell of an adjustment for me.

I just can't think of any reasons why this would be a bad thing.... can you?  Can anyone?

TH

[Brent Hutto]

Tom,

Are you going to somehow outlaw counting ones steps? Are you going to make it against the Rules to take notes when you're playing to use the next time you play that course?

People who want to score well in medal play tend to believe that knowing how far they need to hit the ball is an advantage leading to lower scores. They will inevitably find ways to ascertain distance as exactly as possible for as many shots as possible since they believe that information leads to lower scores (which it does BTW).

[Tom Huckaby]

Tom,

Are you going to somehow outlaw counting ones steps? Are you going to make it against the Rules to take notes when you're playing to use the next time you play that course?

People who want to score well in medal play tend to believe that knowing how far they need to hit the ball is an advantage leading to lower scores. They will inevitably find ways to ascertain distance as exactly as possible for as many shots as possible since they believe that information leads to lower scores (which it does BTW).

Brent:

One can play however one wishes; he just will not be allowed to have distance information available on the course.  He can (and perhaps many will) create notes (or purchase such) if he remains a slave to knowing numbers.  He just can't take that information with him on the course - that would be an open book test.

Those who do find ways to ascertain distance will be rewarded for their ingenuity.  That's part of the judgment skill that I feel ought to be rewarded.  It will result in lower scores for those diligent enough, creative enough, savvy enough, skillful enough... all adjectives connoting things that ought to be rewarded, don't you think?

I figure, however, that over time, this will be more and more of a pain, and just ascertaining what CLUB to hit will become more and more fundamental (ie next to this bush is a 7iron, as opposed to next to this bush is 150 and that means a 7iron).

But however it happens and whatever happens, a skill that seems fundamental to the game to me gets reintroduced, the game gets more complex, the game gets more fun.

No?

[Sean_A]

Tom,

Are you going to somehow outlaw counting ones steps? Are you going to make it against the Rules to take notes when you're playing to use the next time you play that course?

People who want to score well in medal play tend to believe that knowing how far they need to hit the ball is an advantage leading to lower scores. They will inevitably find ways to ascertain distance as exactly as possible for as many shots as possible since they believe that information leads to lower scores (which it does BTW).

So don't folks think there is any difference between gaining information and knowledge through experience is any different than being gifted the information and knowledge of experience?  

Ciao

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()