Could you cite some specifics, because my experience has been that rounds take far longer today, than they did 50 years ago.[/size][/color]
I agreed that yardage markers have slowed down play. However, I believe rangefinders speed up play when the alternative is pacing off yardages. A bounce off of the slow play trough. Perhaps not having ANY data available would allow golf to go back to how fast it was, however I don't think that is a realistic option to look forward to. Reversing decades of yardage use would be very hard to do. I will attempt to find past threads from guys who have seen tournament rounds speed up when allowing rangefinders later tonight.
Have you ever played Pine Valley or Merion ? If so, you know that you won't find any yardage indicators in the fairways/sprinkler heads/flanks.
Yes, not as often as you though....but enough to know their yardage books have numbers in them. So does Friars Head, to refer to your previous post. But I'm sure you're aware of that too
Point is, just b/c the numbers aren't ON the heads, doesn't mean the heads aren't marked. In a book or on a head, its semantics.
And yet, the game is played at a brisk pace, despite the penal nature of both courses.
In my experience, a gentle reminder from the member host at the beginning of the round that sub 4 hour rounds are not just the norm, but absolutely expected is the reason for that. I've found the 4 person cart roaming around Brookline has a great affect on guest's slow play psychology as well.
Let a player insist as much as he wants, about distance, size of the hole or anything else that bothers him.
If the rules don't permit it, either play away or take up another sport.
I will not debate you on what's right and wrong about needing to know distance. However, I will tell you that my generation has grown up knowing distances. Yours didn't. As difficult as it may be for yours to accept rangefinders, it may be for mine to allow their disappearance. I dislike using differences in age as an easy solution to solve a complex problem, but it may be appropriate in this case.
Again, the emphasis on "SCORE" and the deemphasis on match play is one of the culprits.[/size][/color]
Pretty sure match play requires you to score better than your opponent. As long as the goal is to get the ball in the hole in as few strokes as possible, golfers will likely choose to have as much information as possible. Information overload? That's up for debate, I'll grant...a rangefinder will be very useful to a scratch, while maybe not so much for a 25.
The quickest way is to analyze your shot during the long walk to your ball, make a final determination when you get to your ball, pick your club and fire away.
I recently played in an event that permitted range finders.
We played in twosomes.
It took us four hours and twelve minutes.
We waited on EVERY SHOT.
There's NO EXCUSE for slow play and there's NO EXCUSE for twosomes taking more than three (3) hours.
I totally agree that's too long. But I doubt rangefinders were the sole reason for the slow play. The time it takes to zap yardages over the course of the entire round may be equal to what one's entire putting routine on just one or two holes.
To reverse the ageism in my post, I'll concede I have no idea how I screwed up your green print