[John Moore II]

Last week, I played in a regional qualifier for the US Public Links.  My starting time was 8:46 a.m.  The starter, after welcoming us and reviewing the rules sheet, said "We intend to cut the field and start round two at 12:30."  There were two more groups after us, which meant an expected pace of play of 3 hours and 30 minutes or less.

55 minutes later, my threesome was waiting on the third tee.  We watched as a player on the maybe-reachable par five paced from the 200 yard disc to his ball, which was probably 265 yards from the green.  An hour after we hit our first shots, we began play on the third hole.

Both in this competitive environment and more casual amateur play, I cannot conceive that distance devices would not absolutely speed up play.

WW

If pacing 130 yards (65 back and forth does not qualify for a penalty for slow play I don't know what does....

PS Round two did not begin on time.

Well, that may be true in a perfect world, but in this case, I will promise it wasn't. With him saying there were 90 players in the field and the time ranges given (assuming teetimes from about 730am until 9am, that works out to 15 starting times given 10 minute intervals and double tee start) there is no way they would be penalized for playing slow. I'd bet they were keeping pace with the group in front of them. And the first group of the day can only play so fast, I've seen too many times (go watch the PGA Tour, this happens every week) where the first group off #1 finishes the front nine before the 920 group tees off #10 and they have to wait on the tee for 10, 15, 20 minutes. By that time you have 3 or 4 groups stacked up on #10 tee waiting to tee off and the whole day is royally screwed. Slow play and position on the course, I am sorry to say is not determined by a stop watch, its determined by the group ahead and behind. If the group ahead is 3 holes in front of you and there are 2 or 3 groups stacked up behind you, you're out of position, I don't care if you just played 9 holes in an hour.


Oh, and Ed, hopefully this doesn't make you cancel the teetime for Monday, but I tend to use a cheater line to putt. I do try to be quick about it though.

[JWinick]

If you like competition, any competitor will do anything legal possible to gain an advantage.  That's the whole point of it.  Ask Tiger.   Is there any advantage Tiger won't exploit (fitness, psychology, course knowledge, etc.?)  

While I am just a 10-handicapper, I enjoy the competition.  I have never met anyone who takes the game seriously who doesn't care about distance.   I fail to see how a rangefinder inconveniences anyone.  I can't tell you how many times someone has asked me to gun a shot for them.  I'm happy to do it!

Inconvenience anyone?  I really wish you would stop demagoging in order to make me look bad.  Your argument is range finder and/or putter line = inconvenience.   Please pick up some intellectual honesty when you're at Wallgreen's next time.  

J,
   So as long as you are a "competitor" you can do whatever you want because it is legal and you don't give a crap if you inconvenience anyone, because dammit you are a "competitor". If you think for one second you can line up a cheater line without slowing play you are simply living in an alternate universe. BTW what tour do you play on?

[Andy Troeger]

J,
   So as long as you are a "competitor" you can do whatever you want because it is legal and you don't give a crap if you inconvenience anyone, because dammit you are a "competitor". If you think for one second you can line up a cheater line without slowing play you are simply living in an alternate universe. BTW what tour do you play on?

Ed,
I use the line on the ball to putt too a good portion of the time and am calling a misfire on this one. I pretty well guarantee I can have the thing lined up and be over the ball by the time the previous player has marked or picked their ball out of the hole on longer putts and be pretty darn close behind them on shorter ones. I have a hard time believing anyone will ever call me slow.

[Sean_A]

If you like competition, any competitor will do anything legal possible to gain an advantage.  That's the whole point of it.  Ask Tiger.   Is there any advantage Tiger won't exploit (fitness, psychology, course knowledge, etc.?)  

While I am just a 10-handicapper, I enjoy the competition.  I have never met anyone who takes the game seriously who doesn't care about distance.   I fail to see how a rangefinder inconveniences anyone.  I can't tell you how many times someone has asked me to gun a shot for them.  I'm happy to do it!

Inconvenience anyone?  I really wish you would stop demagoging in order to make me look bad.  Your argument is range finder and/or putter line = inconvenience.   Please pick up some intellectual honesty when you're at Wallgreen's next time.  

J,
   So as long as you are a "competitor" you can do whatever you want because it is legal and you don't give a crap if you inconvenience anyone, because dammit you are a "competitor". If you think for one second you can line up a cheater line without slowing play you are simply living in an alternate universe. BTW what tour do you play on?

J

Being a competitor has nothing to do with slow play.  Also, there are literally thousands and thousands of players who will not do everything possible (within the rules) to gain an advantage.  I think this thread is ample demonstration of that.  I would respectfully suggest that given your level of skill, perhaps you take the game a bit too seriously.  For nearly everybody golf is recreation; a chance to get some fresh air with mates and have a little bit of light hearted competition - thus the reason for handicaps.  These things become even more important if we are talking about handicap golf because the idea of a handicap completely flies in the face of fair competition. 

Finally, I can't possibly see how a line on the ball can in anyway for any reason be compared to a yardage gun. 

Ciao

[JWinick]

Sean,

When it comes to golf, I am a libertarian, while some people on this board are autocrats who want to impose their way of playing the game on everybody else.   I don't quite understand why you or anyone else feel the need to tell people how they should play the game.   

We can all agree on a) follow the rules, b) play without delay, and c) have fun.    I don't understand why you feel the need to tell me that I should take the game less seriously and play the game the way you think I should.   That's the problem I have with Melvyn.  I think it's great that he enjoys the game the way he enjoys it.   And, I play plenty of casual rounds where we play for just the pure enjoyment of the game, sans range finder, or anything else.   But, the elitist attitude that there is only one way to play the game is a real turn-off.   

My point was that the competition of golf is an important element for a lot of people.  And, I've never heard of any person who takes the game seriously who doesn't care about distance.   If we accept the fact that rangefinders are a) legal, and b) speed up play (for the person who cares about distance), I can't comprehend how you can seek to ban them. 

Now, if you want to debate about what should be illegal, I may join some people in believing that the long/belly butters seem to be an unfair advantage as they reduce tension on the putting stroke.  To me, they are an example of the USGA allowing technology to go too far.   The golf ball is another example.   

[Melvyn Morrow]

If I appear not to agree with you am I an elitist. 

Let us stop for one moment and again try to put the record straight re yardage aids and golf.

My opinion is that any form of yardage aid is not required in any form of golf. Why – because the golfer has that inbuilt ability to judge distance. So why do they seek aid from outside sources, I just do not know the answer to that.

I have used my knowledge, family information and the efforts of my research to-date trying to explain how the game was played (without yardage aids) for centuries. I am certainly not telling you or anyone else how to conduct yourself on a course. Just explaining how it was (for centuries) and that IMHO every golfer that uses any form of yardage aid is conning himself into believing he his not getting an advantage from these aids. OK its not real advantage, its all in the head type advantage. Therefore, whatever it’s a mental advantage so in my view should make them illegal, but they are not and are legal.

I have also said that I believe we have become so indoctrinated by the need of this type of information that it is infesting our game. To prove my point again look at Andy’s photo re reply #147 and his comment re reply #150, I quote
“I have no interest whatsoever in tackling that hole without yardage information—sorry”.  I think Andy has put my case for me in such a simple and straightforward way. Do you guys not see why I keeping yearning for the way golf was played for centuries? Clearly some view the modern game in a different light and believe attitudes like ‘make it easy or I might not play’ acceptable. Pity what ever happened to fun and challenging, seems that some will never know that concept.

I’m not elitist, nor are others who share the same values and enjoy golf for the game it was (or I should say is when we play it with our friends). We have not moved away from the game of golf but are keeping it alive and true to itself.
So you use yardage aids, fine, it legal, it is just that some of us have more respect for ourselves and the game and believe that yardage aids relates to cheating ourselves, clearly you don’t, which I sincerely believe is a shame. 

As I have mentioned before no golfer needs any form of yardage aid to play golf. A simple analogy would be when driving and you have to stop, do you need any form of yardage age to calculate where you must stop or does your body automatically react. Do you think yardage aids would help and speed up your reactions thus earlier braking – I think not. It is a useless aid that is taking over the game – I would not be surprised that in 50 years or so golf will no longer be called golf but Yardage. I can just see the guys leaving home saying we are off for a few rounds of yardage, oh well that progress I suppose.

Melvyn
(not Sir Melvyn but apparently Elitist Melvyn, but then that better than some names I’ve been call on here by so called Gentlemen of GCA.com and Golf)

PS I wonder if a Referee in a golf match would accept   “I have no interest whatsoever in tackling that hole without yardage information—sorry” as a legitimate excuse for not playing a hole? I think he might say go and pick up your teddy bear and get back in your pram.

[Andy Troeger]

So you use yardage aids, fine, it legal, it is just that some of us have more respect for ourselves and the game and believe that yardage aids relates to cheating ourselves, clearly you don’t, which I sincerely believe is a shame. 

Melvyn,
If you want to understand why people get frustrated with your comments please read the sentence above. If I read this correctly you imply that those of us that use yardage aids disrespect ourselves and the game, DESPITE the LEGALITY of the yardage markers in question! If the USGA and R&A say something like yardage markers are legal then they have become part of the modern game og GOLF, like it or not!

You want to be able to play the game the way you learned it, but say that anyone who learned it in a slightly different fashion disrespects the game because its not the way you learned it or the way it was played in the 19th Century. I really do admire your passion for your beliefs even if I disagree with them, but that part frustrates me.

[ed_getka]

If you like competition, any competitor will do anything legal possible to gain an advantage.  That's the whole point of it.  Ask Tiger.   Is there any advantage Tiger won't exploit (fitness, psychology, course knowledge, etc.?)  

While I am just a 10-handicapper, I enjoy the competition.  I have never met anyone who takes the game seriously who doesn't care about distance.   I fail to see how a rangefinder inconveniences anyone.  I can't tell you how many times someone has asked me to gun a shot for them.  I'm happy to do it!

Inconvenience anyone?  I really wish you would stop demagoging in order to make me look bad.  Your argument is range finder and/or putter line = inconvenience.   Please pick up some intellectual honesty when you're at Wallgreen's next time.  

J,
   So as long as you are a "competitor" you can do whatever you want because it is legal and you don't give a crap if you inconvenience anyone, because dammit you are a "competitor". If you think for one second you can line up a cheater line without slowing play you are simply living in an alternate universe. BTW what tour do you play on?

Well you haven't met me, but I can assure you I take the game seriously and I don't care about distance. I will keep my eyes open for that intellectual honesty they sell at Walgreens.

[ed_getka]

J,
   So as long as you are a "competitor" you can do whatever you want because it is legal and you don't give a crap if you inconvenience anyone, because dammit you are a "competitor". If you think for one second you can line up a cheater line without slowing play you are simply living in an alternate universe. BTW what tour do you play on?

Ed,
I use the line on the ball to putt too a good portion of the time and am calling a misfire on this one. I pretty well guarantee I can have the thing lined up and be over the ball by the time the previous player has marked or picked their ball out of the hole on longer putts and be pretty darn close behind them on shorter ones. I have a hard time believing anyone will ever call me slow.

Andy,
   I never really noticed you used the line so you obviously didn't slow us down. The only reason the cheater line even occured to me was I just saw 3 nitwits golfing the other day in front of me miss a completely benign 150 yard green with their tee shots, then they chipped on and spent a collective 2-3 minutes using their cheater lines to line up their putts, and they ALL missed their putts. I guess my biggest problem with cheater lines is when they are used by "golfers" who don't have enough game to even accomplish anything but slowing down play. End of rant.

[Andy Troeger]

Ed,
I agree with you in whole, but its the attitude of the player as opposed to the actual lining up of the ball that causes the delay.

[Brian Cenci]

Dave Schmidt,
     You obviously didn't see myself or Nev or even Freeman with our Bushnells out at Kingsley last weekend.  I was using mine with enthusiasm all weekend and was hoping someone would make a comment.

-Cenci

[Steve Lang]

   Is use of a caddie's guidance, knowledge, and even pulling a club then disrespectful of ourselves and a shame?

just wondering

[Sean_A]

Sean,

When it comes to golf, I am a libertarian, while some people on this board are autocrats who want to impose their way of playing the game on everybody else.   I don't quite understand why you or anyone else feel the need to tell people how they should play the game.   

We can all agree on a) follow the rules, b) play without delay, and c) have fun.    I don't understand why you feel the need to tell me that I should take the game less seriously and play the game the way you think I should.   That's the problem I have with Melvyn.  I think it's great that he enjoys the game the way he enjoys it.   And, I play plenty of casual rounds where we play for just the pure enjoyment of the game, sans range finder, or anything else.   But, the elitist attitude that there is only one way to play the game is a real turn-off.   

My point was that the competition of golf is an important element for a lot of people.  And, I've never heard of any person who takes the game seriously who doesn't care about distance.   If we accept the fact that rangefinders are a) legal, and b) speed up play (for the person who cares about distance), I can't comprehend how you can seek to ban them. 

Now, if you want to debate about what should be illegal, I may join some people in believing that the long/belly butters seem to be an unfair advantage as they reduce tension on the putting stroke.  To me, they are an example of the USGA allowing technology to go too far.   The golf ball is another example.   

J

I don't care how you play the game because there is absolutely nothing I can do about you even if I wanted to.  Like most things in life, people take a short term view of things and don't worry about where trends are heading - golfers are no different.  Sometimes rule makers get it wrong.  In this case we have to ask three questions.  What is the easiest thing to do?  What is the right thing to do?  What is the best thing to do?  The answers are very clear to me and I know the USGA/R&A took the easy route.

That said, I find the idea of trying to be very competitive while using handicaps to be incongruous.  Given this, why worry so much about gaining an advantage over your mates and club members?

Ciao

[JWinick]

Sean,

The whole point of the handicap system is to allow people to play friendly or serious games with someone of different abilities.  I fail to see how a handicap and being competitive are mutually exclusive.   Perhaps, you are a scratch golfer who thinks that competition only belongs to people of your ability.   Please clarify.

I think the rule makers recognize that the typical golf course being built today is substantially more difficult than the courses of yesterday.   If a club wants to allow a rangefinder as a local rule, they are free to do it.   At the pro level, rangefinders are irrelevant as the caddies know all the yardages anyway as they use them in their practice rounds.   At the competitive and non-competitive club level, do you really think that the devices make much of a difference as to alter the way the game is played?  Are you worried that club players are getting too good?  If anything, the technology at that level has not kept up with the increased difficulty of the courses. 

I suppose the use of a device just annoys people.   It doesn't make any noise, so I'm not sure why it would bother anyone.  Perhaps, it creates a "rangefinder gap" which means non-users feel that they are at a disadvantage if they don't shell out 300 bucks.   

[Sean_A]

Sean,

The whole point of the handicap system is to allow people to play friendly or serious games with someone of different abilities.  I fail to see how a handicap and being competitive are mutually exclusive.   Perhaps, you are a scratch golfer who thinks that competition only belongs to people of your ability.   Please clarify.

I think the rule makers recognize that the typical golf course being built today is substantially more difficult than the courses of yesterday.   If a club wants to allow a rangefinder as a local rule, they are free to do it.   At the pro level, rangefinders are irrelevant as the caddies know all the yardages anyway as they use them in their practice rounds.   At the competitive and non-competitive club level, do you really think that the devices make much of a difference as to alter the way the game is played?  Are you worried that club players are getting too good?  If anything, the technology at that level has not kept up with the increased difficulty of the courses. 

I suppose the use of a device just annoys people.   It doesn't make any noise, so I'm not sure why it would bother anyone.  Perhaps, it creates a "rangefinder gap" which means non-users feel that they are at a disadvantage if they don't shell out 300 bucks.   

J

Yes, the point of a handicap is eliminate the skill difference to make a match artificially competitive.  I play handicap golf all the time, but I am under no illusion that it is truly competitive.  We can all suspend belief for four hours like we do at the cinema for two hours, but I have on question for you.  If you beat a guy playing flat as opposed to with shots, do you feel any different?  I know I do because I truly deserved to win.  You know, there is a reason that savy punters don't bet on handicap horse races.  They know its not really a proper race and that their knowledge of the sport and the skills of those involved are mitigated by the situation.  Golf is no different.  We find out the true skills of a golfer when he doesn't get shots to play with.  That in a nutshell is why I can't take handicap golf too seriously and why I never bet more than a few bob a 9. 

I stated before that I think yardage guns can and do make difference at any level and especially after a bad miss.  However, my main concern is how the architecture is mitigated and what the possible long term consequences of this could be.  IMO, I don't see any positive in terms of the game and I think we are risking a lot. Furthermore, I don't think we have seen the end of how machines will help golfers.  The flood gates are wide open.  Most folks go on about speeding up the game, but this is only context with other yardage devices and I must stress only if the machine is in the right hands.     

Ciao
 

[Richard Choi]

If making the game easier and faster, thus attracting more people to the game is not positive, then Sean, I agree with you that there is nothing positive to the game.

[Sean_A]

If making the game easier and faster, thus attracting more people to the game is not positive, then Sean, I agree with you that there is nothing positive to the game.

Richard

Like many on this site, you are confusing the game with the business of the game.  The two are separate despite the long term efforts of the USGA to make them blend as one. 

If you want the game easier and faster, doesn't it make sense to build easier courses that are easier to navigate?  Why are we going through a charade of building stupidly difficult courses in areas not hospitable to golf if it just means using machines to play them? I will tell you why, that is the business end and it has nothing to do with the game itself. 

Ciao 

[Melvyn Morrow]

Sean

Well said.


Richard

I have never been able to understand why people who are attracted to a game or sport, presume for the fun and challenge, then go about trying to change the very reason for playing the game in the first place.

If golf is to continue down the path of making it easier, do you really thing it would attract more to the game? I am under the impression that people like to be tested, to rise to the challenge, to try to seek to improve themselves. 

Many may wonder why I am so protective of my native game, of wanting to see the quality of our course improve, architects rising to the challenge to combat the long Drives. Players realising that to get the best out of them and their game they need to walk, feel the design unfold in front of them, face their abilities square on and also meet the challenge of the game. However, what we get are comments along the lines on making the game easier.

The name of the Game is Golf, it’s not Cartball (Cartgolf), nor is it Yardagegolf, Aidedgolf or for that matter EasyGolf, however Crazygolf is getting closer to describe our modern reliance on anything but our own ability.   

Nevertheless, there still are thank God many smaller less know courses in GB&I that honour the true ways of walking with no yardage markers, making for some real great fun. Moreover, all this for just few £ unlike the better know courses. Oh yes the name on the Game on these course is GOLF.

Richard, I hope you have an easy, but I will not say fast life. That you come to realise that easy is not always, what many seek. The country you now love and is giving you all that you could wish for was not founded on easy. The early trappers went west away from the east coast, facing challenges and hardships while slowly open out the country. The very thing that created your country was not founded on easy, yet the modern generations are looking for the easy way, believing that perhaps life owes them a living and just maybe that the golf course should be made easy to help them improve their score. Bur Richards for many Golf is not like that, I am so please to say.

I hope your life Richard is full of worthwhile challenges that will make your family and grandchildren proud.

Melvyn   

[JWinick]

Sean,

Your ideas of more playable golf courses are good, but it is not reality.   And, don't expect many changes to golf courses in this Great Recession.   So, let's just deal with golf as it is, not the way you wish it would be.

Your argument is the fallacy of the slippery slope.   You act as if the golfing public and the rules officials can't stop themselves from embracing every form of technology possible.  The machines are taking over, you say.   But, the golfers I know would bristle at any technology that fundamentally altered the game.   For example, Al's putter in Caddyshack.   The rules officials have already controlled the grooves, the clubhead sizes and trampoline effect, and are now considering the ball.   Isn't that enough evidence that the slipperly slope argument doesn't hold water?   

To answer your question, of course I would feel better if I beat an opponent without any strokes.   But, it doesn't make that much of a difference.   Because the reason I would feel better is that it meant that I played even better.   

If making the game easier and faster, thus attracting more people to the game is not positive, then Sean, I agree with you that there is nothing positive to the game.

Richard

Like many on this site, you are confusing the game with the business of the game.  The two are separate despite the long term efforts of the USGA to make them blend as one. 

If you want the game easier and faster, doesn't it make sense to build easier courses that are easier to navigate?  Why are we going through a charade of building stupidly difficult courses in areas not hospitable to golf if it just means using machines to play them? I will tell you why, that is the business end and it has nothing to do with the game itself. 

Ciao 

[Sean_A]

Sean,

Your ideas of more playable golf courses are good, but it is not reality.   And, don't expect many changes to golf courses in this Great Recession.   So, let's just deal with golf as it is, not the way you wish it would be.

Your argument is the fallacy of the slippery slope.   You act as if the golfing public and the rules officials can't stop themselves from embracing every form of technology possible.  The machines are taking over, you say.   But, the golfers I know would bristle at any technology that fundamentally altered the game.   For example, Al's putter in Caddyshack.   The rules officials have already controlled the grooves, the clubhead sizes and trampoline effect, and are now considering the ball.   Isn't that enough evidence that the slipperly slope argument doesn't hold water?   

To answer your question, of course I would feel better if I beat an opponent without any strokes.   But, it doesn't make that much of a difference.   Because the reason I would feel better is that it meant that I played even better.   

If making the game easier and faster, thus attracting more people to the game is not positive, then Sean, I agree with you that there is nothing positive to the game.

Richard

Like many on this site, you are confusing the game with the business of the game.  The two are separate despite the long term efforts of the USGA to make them blend as one. 

If you want the game easier and faster, doesn't it make sense to build easier courses that are easier to navigate?  Why are we going through a charade of building stupidly difficult courses in areas not hospitable to golf if it just means using machines to play them? I will tell you why, that is the business end and it has nothing to do with the game itself. 

Ciao 

J

Reality is what we make it.  We all have choices to make and those choices effect the game.  That is why I ahve always said I have no time for people that go on about the equipment dumbing down the game then we find them standing in line for the equipment - in the name of competition of course.  It would be silly to give an advantage away when playing for some virtually meaningless trophy.  When golfers figure out that they have the power to control the destiny of the game, we have a chance of being better off.  Waiting for the USGA to protect the game is like waiting for a cop - don't waste your dime. 

I certainly disagree with you concerning the slippery slope.  I have witnessed it happening for my entire lifetime.  The latest slide is the yardage gun.  While all the talk about clubs was happening, the USGA decided to allow yardage guns.  I don't know how many times I heard these would never be allowed by the USGA, yet somehow we slid further down the slope.  You could be right though about the slope, but only if we have already hit the bottom.     

Ciao

[PCCraig]

Plus, does anybody really want to guess yardages on a hole like this? It might work on links courses, but I would argue not here...

Well, I'll take a stab at it....from the front of that tee, it looks like 130 to the front, 145 to the middle and 159 or so to the back.  

Is that Bull Valley?

[Lou_Duran]

On the practice tee a couple days ago, a guy was tinkering with his "Sonocaddie" so I asked him for the distances to a couple of target greens.  He came over and showed me that he had the entire range programmed, as well as the nearby short game practice area.  In the next few minutes, three other guys came by with their GPS gismos, all different models, and computing within a couple of yards of each other.  Pretty nifty.

The advantages for practicing are obvious, particularly with the short game shots.  I asked whether these things slowed play, and they thought that I was joking.  Since the units are virtual, it takes but a second or two to know near-exact distances.  Compared to looking for a yardage marker, stepping off or estimating the difference, and wondering whether the calculation/impression is right, their arguments appear valid.  For those who play their golf at many different courses with little chance to gain home advantage, these things make a lot of sense.

[Tom Huckaby]

Lou:

Didn't you get the memo?  LOGIC is not allowed in this thread.  Shame on you.

Quite seriously it seems so patently obvious to me these things save time, I am bamboozled at those who would argue against them in that respect.  Now argue against them in terms of purity of the game, more power to you.  But they do quite clearly save time, for those who want exact distances anyway.  And before the naysayers go off again, yes I know they do not save time in an absolute sense and the game could be played more quickly without any reliance on distance information at all.  That's a reality not likely to happen any time soon in the US, but it is a nice fantasy.

TH

[Phil McDade]

The slippery slope is a fallacy?

LOL! 

The slippery slope is extremely real.  It is as consistent as the sunrise.  It's human nature to stretch precedent.

Griswold v. Connecticut led to Roe v. Wade. 

 

Well, it really started w/ Skinner vs. Oklahoma (1942)...

[Niall C]

I spent the last few days down at Glasgow Gailes watching the Open Qualifier including some of the practice days. The guys were quite thorough in taking notes and some of them, although not all, used GPS/rangefinders on the practice days to note landing areas etc. Come the actual days of play, the guys seemed to work out there yardages quite quickly from stepping of from the nearest noted landmark. They also moved fairly swiftly between shots and had were pretty well decided on what shot they were hitting when it became there turn.

Where they lost a lot of time was with there pre-shot routines, the numerous practice swings and standing over the shot visualising it for an eternity before playing it. The other area they lost time was on the green with the constant marking of short putts. I had an interesting conversation with an R&A rules official who agreed that was where the problems areas were. He even suggested that they had thought about letting each player only mark his ball only once on each green in order to speed up play but had binned the idea for being unworkable.

Niall

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()