There is clearly a difference between the game as played from a cart and played walking. My perspective is different from Melvyn's, as I see them both as golf, but that's probably easier to say for someone born and raised in the United States on courses where carts have always been an option (an option taken by many (sometimes myself included) regardless of how easily walkable a course might be). For Melvyn, and for many others, one is golf and one is cartball, and one is worth doing and the other isn't. I can understand that perspective. The easiest way to express that feeling is by walking the golf course and avoiding the cart. On this discussion group Melvyn stands up for what he believes and doesn't relent, and calls it the way he sees it. I've felt that he comes across as holier-than-thou now and again, but characterizing him as "the village idiot" strikes me as unfair, and un-called-for.
Here's a few of those "clear differences:"
Walking is exercise. A putt is harder to make if the heart is pounding a bit after an uphill walk. Fitness plays a part in the game. Certainly not the part that it plays in other more strenuous games, but a part nonetheless. The more fit golfer is better able to hit the necessary shots late in a round. For the very fit athlete this may seem like a joke, but for many it makes a difference.
Walking gives me better perspective on distance, and on my next shot. It's like when you go from traveling by car to traveling by train to traveling by airplane.......as the trip gets faster, your perspective on exactly what your covering changes. Golf is a game where distances, and perspective on distance matters.
In golf the venue matters. More than in baseball or basketball or soccer or hockey or tennis........each course is uniquely different. Walking the course is a more connective experience. Riding puts something between you and that experience.
I feel like I'm just yammering on, and not making much sense, but to me these and many other differences between walking golf and riding golf exist. The greater point for each golfer is not whether or not they are different but how important and compelling those differences are. For the scratch golfer Rob mentioned in his post, the differences obviously don't matter so much. I'm more in the middle - I certainly prefer to walk, but have often taken a cart. For many on this board, and Melvyn particularly, using a cart is anathema to the game. For designers of new courses and the owners who are paying them, the use of carts and the inclusions of cart paths in design is complicated and driven by forces I can't claim to know about. For those who renovate existing courses that were built before the advent of the cart, the choice of building cart paths, etc., is a dicey one.
That said, I appreciate Jim Engh coming into this group and letting us in on how he works. I'm sure he knows this is a tough room. Playing his courses, I've never felt like the holes were created with carts or cart paths specifically in mind. For me the cart path is like a referee when watching a football game - if I remember them too much, then something was probably wrong. I can't say I have a strong memory of a cart path on the courses of Jim Engh's that I've played. I do remember a lot of the holes, though. My main design issue with cart paths is when they're too visible, or especially when they cut across the fairway in front of a green. I'm sure in the cases where this takes place there's a reason for it, or a need for it, or something.....but still.
"The grass is always greener when it bursts up through concrete"
-Andy Partridge