[Duncan Cheslett]

Lasers/gps should be banned in my book.


Jon

I agree. Eyeballing with a 150 yard post for reference should be sufficient for everyone.


There is nothing sadder than the golfer who lasers EVERY shot, even on his home course when surely he has played from every blade of grass on the place! It is particularly sad when said golfer plays off a handicap of 24!


I would go further and ban tour pros from getting any assistance whatsoever from their caddy. A caddy should carry the bag and rake the odd bunker. End of.

[A.G._Crockett]

Lasers/gps should be banned in my book.


Jon

I agree. Eyeballing with a 150 yard post for reference should be sufficient for everyone.


There is nothing sadder than the golfer who lasers EVERY shot, even on his home course when surely he has played from every blade of grass on the place! It is particularly sad when said golfer plays off a handicap of 24!


I would go further and ban tour pros from getting any assistance whatsoever from their caddy. A caddy should carry the bag and rake the odd bunker. End of.

Oh, Duncan...

[Jon Wiggett]

As to tour pros using books and talking incessantly chatting with their looper re:yardage.  First it's still illegal on the major  tours.  Secondly I think the new generation is much more into the "team concept " than in prior years.  Thus the seemingly endless verbiage has become part of th dare shot routine for many pros.

Discussing distances or anything else to do with the shot is perfectly legal on all the major tours. Secondly, pros are all very different with some enjoying a close bond with a caddy and others not wanting much beyond a carry/club cleaning service. This is as true for previous generations as the current.

[Sean_A]

Lasers/gps should be banned in my book.


Jon

I agree. Eyeballing with a 150 yard post for reference should be sufficient for everyone.


There is nothing sadder than the golfer who lasers EVERY shot, even on his home course when surely he has played from every blade of grass on the place! It is particularly sad when said golfer plays off a handicap of 24!


I would go further and ban tour pros from getting any assistance whatsoever from their caddy. A caddy should carry the bag and rake the odd bunker. End of.

Duncan


I am in your camp simply because lasers, caddies etc are layers of stuff between the golfer and the course.  Generally speaking, the fewer layers between these two prime and only essential components of the game, the better. Remove the crutches and we can all see who is truly the best golfer on any given day.


Ciao 

[A.G._Crockett]

Lasers/gps should be banned in my book.


Jon

I agree. Eyeballing with a 150 yard post for reference should be sufficient for everyone.


There is nothing sadder than the golfer who lasers EVERY shot, even on his home course when surely he has played from every blade of grass on the place! It is particularly sad when said golfer plays off a handicap of 24!


I would go further and ban tour pros from getting any assistance whatsoever from their caddy. A caddy should carry the bag and rake the odd bunker. End of.

Duncan


I am in your camp simply because lasers, caddies etc are layers of stuff between the golfer and the course.  Generally speaking, the fewer layers between these two prime and only essential components of the game, the better. Remove the crutches and we can all see who is truly the best golfer on any given day.


Ciao

Not necessarily, Sean.  What you might more likely see is which golfer, all other things equal, knows the golf course being played better.  I play well over 100 rounds a year on my home course, and I know my club selection almost without consulting sprinkler heads or GPS or laser or anything else.  If you play me THERE, that's a pretty sizeable advantage for me that has nothing to do with "who is truly the best golfer on a given day".

If you are referring to the PGA Tour, maybe that's a bit different.  But I've got to be honest; watching pros hit shots of lesser quality because they don't know the yardage doesn't appeal to me very much. 

But even if you are not referring to the Tour, you are making a completely arbitrary distinction of the "layers" so as to NOT include knowledge of distance.  There are decidedly NOT just "two prime and only essential elements of the game"; there are implements and balls, the Rules, the format of competition, the weather conditions, and so on. 

At any rate, if you REALLY want to see who is the best golfer on a given day, put them on equal footing as far as knowing distances; don't reward the one with better eyesight, or a better ability to pace accurately, or a better prior knowledge of the golf course; reward them for playing golf!

[Tim Gavrich]

It's funny to me that threads like this always seem to contain an element of folks trying to one-up each other over how old-timey their approach to playing golf is. In this thread's case, it's an all-out donnybrook over who hits shots with the least information beforehand. It's the "Name That Tune" of GCA. Which is fine, of course - to each his own.


It's fun to play shots without any information whatsoever (Sharon GC in Connecticut, where I played a couple high school matches, had only 150-yard markers), but asserting that that's more (or, for that matter, less) fun than playing shots armed with the yardage is a bit egocentric.


A great deal of my interest in GCA developed as a result of looking at yardage books from courses my dad would bring home from his golf excursions. So I love them - love looking at them, love collecting them. It bums me out that most courses with in-cart GPS don't bother to produce yardage books anymore, because not only are they great guides to get to know a golf course, they're the perfect ex post facto marketing material for a good course because they stir positive memories and make the golfer want to return.


So I like yardage books, and I also use a Bushnell rangefinder (no slope).

[Sean_A]

Lasers/gps should be banned in my book.


Jon

I agree. Eyeballing with a 150 yard post for reference should be sufficient for everyone.


There is nothing sadder than the golfer who lasers EVERY shot, even on his home course when surely he has played from every blade of grass on the place! It is particularly sad when said golfer plays off a handicap of 24!


I would go further and ban tour pros from getting any assistance whatsoever from their caddy. A caddy should carry the bag and rake the odd bunker. End of.

Duncan


I am in your camp simply because lasers, caddies etc are layers of stuff between the golfer and the course.  Generally speaking, the fewer layers between these two prime and only essential components of the game, the better. Remove the crutches and we can all see who is truly the best golfer on any given day.


Ciao

Not necessarily, Sean.  What you might more likely see is which golfer, all other things equal, knows the golf course being played better.  I play well over 100 rounds a year on my home course, and I know my club selection almost without consulting sprinkler heads or GPS or laser or anything else.  If you play me THERE, that's a pretty sizeable advantage for me that has nothing to do with "who is truly the best golfer on a given day".

If you are referring to the PGA Tour, maybe that's a bit different.  But I've got to be honest; watching pros hit shots of lesser quality because they don't know the yardage doesn't appeal to me very much. 

But even if you are not referring to the Tour, you are making a completely arbitrary distinction of the "layers" so as to NOT include knowledge of distance.  There are decidedly NOT just "two prime and only essential elements of the game"; there are implements and balls, the Rules, the format of competition, the weather conditions, and so on. 

At any rate, if you REALLY want to see who is the best golfer on a given day, put them on equal footing as far as knowing distances; don't reward the one with better eyesight, or a better ability to pace accurately, or a better prior knowledge of the golf course; reward them for playing golf!

AG

I don't mind knowledge/advantage gained by experience.  It is far better than buying that experience when we know that the layers of intervention are of different quality and therefore price.  Its a moot point anyway because people with money like the advantage they gain with equipment and caddies...or they wouldn't spend the money.  Golf is an inherently selfish game and golfers rarely let each other forget it.  I have said it many times...the rules should be bifurcated...time to let go of the myths.

Ciao

[Josh Stevens]

I have always just eyeballed.  Grew up course that had no markings, too cheap to buy a laser, and anyway I now play on a course that is so hilly its all a bit pointless.

Shortest distance I ever saw anyone use a rangefinder for was about 45m.  I struggled not to laugh

[Duncan Cheslett]

Shortest distance I ever saw anyone use a rangefinder for was about 45m.  I struggled not to laugh

I see this all the time. 50 yards out, and they laser the pin.


What the fuck???!!!

[A.G._Crockett]

Shortest distance I ever saw anyone use a rangefinder for was about 45m.  I struggled not to laugh

I see this all the time. 50 yards out, and they laser the pin.


What the fuck???!!!

Well, Duncan, since you asked (so eloquently, I might add!) "WTF" the answer is simple.  Many, many instructors, such as Pelz, teach that one should have three swings for each wedge and know how far each will fly when hit properly.  LOTS of players play golf this way, and if they have a 50 yard shot, hit a 3/4 lob wedge, or whatever shot/club their method yields in that case. 

I do not in any way expect you or Sean to like, respect, or even accept that this is a valid way to play the game.  But there are a LOT of players who do.  Believe me, I see the charm in just hitting the ball, going and finding it, and hitting it again without paying attention to sprinkler heads, 150 markers, a GPS or laser device, or a caddy.  But to suggest that it is more pure or morally superior or truer to the roots of the game to do so is curious at best.

I'll also say this:  I play a lot of competitive golf, if only at the club and local level, and not very well.  Not only do I NEVER see a player playing without some idea of the yardage on every shot, but I would LOVE to compete for money against a player who just "eyeballed" each shot with nothing but a rough idea of the distance at hand.  There is a reason that you don't see anybody play that way in competition, from the PGA Tour on down.

[BHoover]

Shortest distance I ever saw anyone use a rangefinder for was about 45m.  I struggled not to laugh

I see this all the time. 50 yards out, and they laser the pin.


What the fuck???!!!

Well, Duncan, since you asked (so eloquently, I might add!) "WTF" the answer is simple.  Many, many instructors, such as Pelz, teach that one should have three swings for each wedge and know how far each will fly when hit properly.  LOTS of players play golf this way, and if they have a 50 yard shot, hit a 3/4 lob wedge, or whatever shot/club their method yields in that case. 

I do not in any way expect you or Sean to like, respect, or even accept that this is a valid way to play the game.  But there are a LOT of players who do.  Believe me, I see the charm in just hitting the ball, going and finding it, and hitting it again without paying attention to sprinkler heads, 150 markers, a GPS or laser device, or a caddy.  But to suggest that it is more pure or morally superior or truer to the roots of the game to do so is curious at best.

I'll also say this:  I play a lot of competitive golf, if only at the club and local level, and not very well.  Not only do I NEVER see a player playing without some idea of the yardage on every shot, but I would LOVE to compete for money against a player who just "eyeballed" each shot with nothing but a rough idea of the distance at hand.  There is a reason that you don't see anybody play that way in competition, from the PGA Tour on down.

This may be the most sensible post I have read on this site in many, many months. Thank you.

[Sean_A]

Shortest distance I ever saw anyone use a rangefinder for was about 45m.  I struggled not to laugh

I see this all the time. 50 yards out, and they laser the pin.


What the fuck???!!!

Well, Duncan, since you asked (so eloquently, I might add!) "WTF" the answer is simple.  Many, many instructors, such as Pelz, teach that one should have three swings for each wedge and know how far each will fly when hit properly.  LOTS of players play golf this way, and if they have a 50 yard shot, hit a 3/4 lob wedge, or whatever shot/club their method yields in that case. 

I do not in any way expect you or Sean to like, respect, or even accept that this is a valid way to play the game.  But there are a LOT of players who do.  Believe me, I see the charm in just hitting the ball, going and finding it, and hitting it again without paying attention to sprinkler heads, 150 markers, a GPS or laser device, or a caddy.  But to suggest that it is more pure or morally superior or truer to the roots of the game to do so is curious at best.

I'll also say this:  I play a lot of competitive golf, if only at the club and local level, and not very well.  Not only do I NEVER see a player playing without some idea of the yardage on every shot, but I would LOVE to compete for money against a player who just "eyeballed" each shot with nothing but a rough idea of the distance at hand.  There is a reason that you don't see anybody play that way in competition, from the PGA Tour on down.

AG

If you are going to mention my name, get my position correct.

I fully accept that using machines or people to provide information to golfers is a valid way to play the game. When have I ever said otherwise?  What I have said is using aids will eventually erode the character of architecture...its another way to codify the game...which in the end, is bad for the game because the archie has tricks which are removed from his bag...of course, in imo.  You can say I claim its a morally superier position to take...I prefer to say its common sense.  So no, I don't like these aids.  I don't see what respect has to do with the issue.

I never said I ignore available info...its impossible to ignore a post, plate or marker.  I do walk off yardage as I walk by plates and use markers as gauges as well as use visual and topographical clues in helping me make decisions.  What I did say is I wish there were no yardage aids or people to rely upon for information.  I realize this is a pipe dream so I can happily settle for markers and plates as compromises...info equally available to all.  I do think guns, lasers and caddies are steps too far and only serve to add layers between the golfer and the course and advantage those willing to spend more money for caddies and lasers and guns etc. 

Should we ever play a game I would be happy to place a small wager on the outcome because its the sociable thing to do.  I am not overly fussed about the outcome because I accept that I am an inferior player in the big scheme of things, but then I expect you already knew that.

Ciao

[Steve Lang]

   You know, its also common sense that if you're spatially challenged, you use whatever aids are available to you, to play better from any yardage, no different than holding a hand rail going down some stairs if you have poor balance or are conscious of your safety.


When playing in with some folks reliant on their lasers or gps, I like to call out the yardage and challenge the aids for fun, that gets em thinking and casts some doubt, always worth a stroke here and there... friendly competition and all


When playing out or in club competitions against others using aids, I like to have my Golf Buddy watch to supplement the visuals or my local knowledge.


When exploring a course, for likely only a single play, give me the raw experience every time and of course any local knowledge offered by companions/host.

[Duncan Cheslett]

Shortest distance I ever saw anyone use a rangefinder for was about 45m.  I struggled not to laugh

I see this all the time. 50 yards out, and they laser the pin.


What the fuck???!!!

Well, Duncan, since you asked (so eloquently, I might add!) "WTF" the answer is simple.  Many, many instructors, such as Pelz, teach that one should have three swings for each wedge and know how far each will fly when hit properly.  LOTS of players play golf this way, and if they have a 50 yard shot, hit a 3/4 lob wedge, or whatever shot/club their method yields in that case. 

I do not in any way expect you or Sean to like, respect, or even accept that this is a valid way to play the game.  But there are a LOT of players who do.  Believe me, I see the charm in just hitting the ball, going and finding it, and hitting it again without paying attention to sprinkler heads, 150 markers, a GPS or laser device, or a caddy.  But to suggest that it is more pure or morally superior or truer to the roots of the game to do so is curious at best.

I'll also say this:  I play a lot of competitive golf, if only at the club and local level, and not very well.  Not only do I NEVER see a player playing without some idea of the yardage on every shot, but I would LOVE to compete for money against a player who just "eyeballed" each shot with nothing but a rough idea of the distance at hand.  There is a reason that you don't see anybody play that way in competition, from the PGA Tour on down.

My gripe isn't with the guy knowing his dialled in distance with each wedge with each swing; it is with him not having the mental capacity to judge distances from as little as 50 yards.


Anyone with half a brain can learn easily to judge such distances without electronic aids. The problem is that many modern golfers have become totally addicted to the use of external information. You might as well programme a robot to play golf.



On proper golf courses the distance alone from so close in is of minimal assistance anyway. Judgement of ground conditions, slope, wind direction, temperature, etc. etc. is far more important that knowing the precise distance your 3/4 lob wedge will fly through the air.

[A.G._Crockett]

Shortest distance I ever saw anyone use a rangefinder for was about 45m.  I struggled not to laugh

I see this all the time. 50 yards out, and they laser the pin.


What the fuck???!!!

Well, Duncan, since you asked (so eloquently, I might add!) "WTF" the answer is simple.  Many, many instructors, such as Pelz, teach that one should have three swings for each wedge and know how far each will fly when hit properly.  LOTS of players play golf this way, and if they have a 50 yard shot, hit a 3/4 lob wedge, or whatever shot/club their method yields in that case. 

I do not in any way expect you or Sean to like, respect, or even accept that this is a valid way to play the game.  But there are a LOT of players who do.  Believe me, I see the charm in just hitting the ball, going and finding it, and hitting it again without paying attention to sprinkler heads, 150 markers, a GPS or laser device, or a caddy.  But to suggest that it is more pure or morally superior or truer to the roots of the game to do so is curious at best.

I'll also say this:  I play a lot of competitive golf, if only at the club and local level, and not very well.  Not only do I NEVER see a player playing without some idea of the yardage on every shot, but I would LOVE to compete for money against a player who just "eyeballed" each shot with nothing but a rough idea of the distance at hand.  There is a reason that you don't see anybody play that way in competition, from the PGA Tour on down.

My gripe isn't with the guy knowing his dialled in distance with each wedge with each swing; it is with him not having the mental capacity to judge distances from as little as 50 yards.


Anyone with half a brain can learn easily to judge such distances without electronic aids. The problem is that many modern golfers have become totally addicted to the use of external information. You might as well programme a robot to play golf.



On proper golf courses the distance alone from so close in is of minimal assistance anyway. Judgement of ground conditions, slope, wind direction, temperature, etc. etc. is far more important that knowing the precise distance your 3/4 lob wedge will fly through the air.

Duncan, you are arguing only with yourself by taking both sides in this post.  You can't say that you have no gripe with the guy that knows his "dialed in" yardages with various partial shots, and then be pissed that he wants to know the precise yardage!  There is just zero consistency in that argument.

Secondly, distance isn't "external information", whatever the hell THAT means!  It's the starting point of how we decide what club to play, and likely has been as long as the game has been played.  A quick way to do that precisely changes NOTHING about the game.  It always amuses me when the assumption is made that the shepherds at St. Andrews several hundred years ago weren't pacing or using yardages, as if you could possibly know THAT!  MY assumption is that there were Anal/OCD shepherds who KNEW after many rounds which club to hit from particular places on the course, and might even have paced the distance from a particular bunker or bush to see what club to hit.  By what possible logic could you say that it was otherwise?  To assume that they didn't want accurate information is to presume that they were either casual, or stupid, or both, isn't it?

And finally, I don't think anybody who is any good at golf ONLY uses the yardage in club selection; it's just a starting point.  You've created a straw man with your rich imagination by presuming that anybody leaves out "ground conditions, slope, wind, temperature, etc etc" as soon as they use a device to ascertain distance.  I don't do that, and I don't know anybody that does.

And BTW, I don't know what a "proper" golf course even means!:)

[Jon Wiggett]

AG,


learning to hit a ball a set distance with a set swing using a specific wedge is not about hitting the ball that distance but about building up a feel for hitting a ball to the target. Were your assumption to be correct then the PGA tour players would use yardages for 20, 30, 40 yard shots but they do not. You take a PGA pro and ask them to hit ten balls to 10 flags spaced at 5 yard increments from 20 yards onwards but in a random sequence each ball will end up within 10 foot of its flag. You ask the same pro to hit 10 balls over a wall which blocks their view and you will find that the results haphazard.


That all the pros use yardage is because it makes it easier by removing a skill from the game. Where as you would not want to watch players hit shots of lesser quality and others might delight in the higher skill level shown by a correctly judged shot unaided by outside help


It is neither better nor worse than your opinion just a different but equally valid point of view.


Jon

[A.G._Crockett]

AG,


learning to hit a ball a set distance with a set swing using a specific wedge is not about hitting the ball that distance but about building up a feel for hitting a ball to the target. Were your assumption to be correct then the PGA tour players would use yardages for 20, 30, 40 yard shots but they do not. You take a PGA pro and ask them to hit ten balls to 10 flags spaced at 5 yard increments from 20 yards onwards but in a random sequence each ball will end up within 10 foot of its flag. You ask the same pro to hit 10 balls over a wall which blocks their view and you will find that the results haphazard.


That all the pros use yardage is because it makes it easier by removing a skill from the game. Where as you would not want to watch players hit shots of lesser quality and others might delight in the higher skill level shown by a correctly judged shot unaided by outside help


It is neither better nor worse than your opinion just a different but equally valid point of view.


Jon

Jon,
I take your point that there might be people that enjoy watching shots struck without the aid of knowing the distance.  There are people who enjoy watching the skills challenges on The Big Break; I don't.

What I find amusing and, quite frankly, simplistic is the idea/belief that estimating distance rather than knowing distance is somehow more in keeping with the traditions of the game and preserves the purity of the game, when there is NO evidence of that.

Until somebody can cite a primary (or even a reliable secondary!) source that proves to me that Old Tom and Young Tom and Harry and James and Francis and the others didn't know distances from various points on the course, and didn't pace from those points to aid in club selection, I'll just continue to harbor a suspicion that they did!  And if I use my very, very limited powers of imagination, I can even imagine those guys writing things down on paper and having notes to refer to.  Of course, I don't know that, just as Duncan and Sean and others don't know that those guys were just "eyeballing" and pulling a club.  But I DO know which of those two options seems more plausible to me...

Further, I see ZERO grounds in logic for distinctions between various ways of calculating distance.  Whether one paces from some marker, be it a sprinkler head or a 150 marker or a bush or a bunker, or whether one has a yardage book or a GPS or a laser, it's all the same.  The GPS and laser just have the advantage of being a LOT faster. 

So I'll say it again: The idea that estimating distance ONLY with one's eyes is a fundamental skill of golf has no basis in fact or history until somebody shows me evidence.  I'll go farther and give my OPINION that estimating distance, while perhaps an admirable skill, is more about one's eyesight and one's experience ON THAT COURSE than it is about determining who is the better golfer.

[Jon Wiggett]

AG,


I do not know whether it is more or less in keeping with the traditions of the game but I never made that point so would appreciate if you would stick to what I said when replying. As to whether judging distance is an added skill well I think anyone with a bit of commonsense knows it is harder to hit the ball the correct distance without the actual yardage and were this not the case I doubt players would waste the time finding the distance out.


As to whether Old Tom Morris and his contemporaries used yardage charts, paced out distances or the like. There are very extensive writings, articles and documents about golf by those playing in this era which go into great detail about what was usual practice at the time and having read quite a bit of it I have yet to come across anything indicating that this was ever done. Were it to be common practice as you suppose then this would certainly have been documented. That it has not been mentioned not only confirms it was not done but also shows it was never even conceived of. The onus is clearly on you to provide proof it did occur and until then I think we can safely discount it.


As a final thought on,[/size] players have always known what club they hit from certain points however and used this to help judge which club to use. This is the sort of template ability that any good player has and judging the distance with the help of aides is more skillful than been given the information of the exact distance.


Jon

[A.G._Crockett]

AG,


I do not know whether it is more or less in keeping with the traditions of the game but I never made that point so would appreciate if you would stick to what I said when replying. As to whether judging distance is an added skill well I think anyone with a bit of commonsense knows it is harder to hit the ball the correct distance without the actual yardage and were this not the case I doubt players would waste the time finding the distance out.


As to whether Old Tom Morris and his contemporaries used yardage charts, paced out distances or the like. There are very extensive writings, articles and documents about golf by those playing in this era which go into great detail about what was usual practice at the time and having read quite a bit of it I have yet to come across anything indicating that this was ever done. Were it to be common practice as you suppose then this would certainly have been documented. That it has not been mentioned not only confirms it was not done but also shows it was never even conceived of. The onus is clearly on you to provide proof it did occur and until then I think we can safely discount it.


As a final thought on, players have always known what club they hit from certain points however and used this to help judge which club to use. This is the sort of template ability that any good player has and judging the distance with the help of aides is more skillful than been given the information of the exact distance.


Jon

Jon,
Thank you!  This the very first onus on me of 2017!

For the record, I have NO interest whatsoever in trying to prove that anybody in golf's past used yardages.  I just said that I can't imagine that they didn't.  Okee dokee?

It's too bad that a thread that was about which way or measuring yardage was best has devolved into a debate between the Flat Earth Society and people living in the 21st century.  I regret my part in that thread jack, and shall resign.

However, I want to announce to all concerned that on Wednesday, the next time that I will play golf instead of just typing about it and in honor of this thread, I intend to pace off the distance from the nearest sprinkler head, consult my yardage book, check my GPS watch, use my Bushnell laser, and consult the Arccos GPS program on my phone on EACH shot, including putts that have been conceded by my fellow competitors.  And in the case of discrepancies in the distance yielded by the four methods, I further intend to average the various numbers and select my club accordingly, not playing any shot until the conclusion of the math problems at hand.

All are welcome to join me.

[Sean_A]

Further, I see ZERO grounds in logic for distinctions between various ways of calculating distance.  Whether one paces from some marker, be it a sprinkler head or a 150 marker or a bush or a bunker, or whether one has a yardage book or a GPS or a laser, it's all the same.  The GPS and laser just have the advantage of being a LOT faster.

1. You can only play as fast as those with you.  I have not seen any increase in pace of play with the introduction of gadgets.  While they may be faster, I can do my thing while others hit or do their thing. 

2. Its not all the same.  Folks pay money for gadgets/caddies to obtain an advantage.  Just as with bazooka drivers and everything else to do with equipment, folks pay for advantages.  Markers and plates are an equal opportunity advantage    I don't mind if a guy wants to outspend me by $500 on equipment (and that is sincere) to win a $2 bet because thats the way of the world, but its sad that this is what golf has come to for what is essentially a bunch of hacks who actually think playing off a 0, 5 or 10 handicap is seriously competing.

Ciao

[JHoulihan]

First of all I want to say thank you to all who have read, and more importantly replied to, this thread over the past few weeks. I rarely post here and this has been a fun topic to keep up with on a daily basis. Here are a few more details that may influence replies.
1 I am currently a 12 handicap who works 40-50 hours weekly so golf is not my number one priority. Saving lives in the hospital setting is.
2 I enjoy playing alone as a single on both trips near home and vacations throughout the US
3 My primary reason for starting this post is because I am committing time and money to join a solid group of others playing in a year long calendar of events starting January 8. This will not only increase my interest higher than normal but also allow me to visit and play many courses I may not have searched out on my own , or just not had availability to since a few are private.
4 Tournament results are based on current USGA handicaps ( and local rules) rewarding both points and cash winnings
5 I have the ability to use something other than my eyes to earn my way up the weekend and year long leaderboard. Is this an advantage over other players, maybe? It is available to all players, but whether they decide to use that advantage is up to each individual player.

If any readers are here in the Phoenix/Scottsdale area, feel free to mesage me - especially if interested in the tournament details

[Pat Burke]

Personal experiences only.
As a player
I spent an enormous amount of time learning to hit shots the correct yardage.  When I missed shots the correct distance 1) I knew i was swinging well 2) I rarely got in round destroying trouble.  Distance control was my strength. 
I was very visually oriented, and very detail oriented in my notes during practice rounds.  I wanted to know where to land shots to have the ball end up in the correct spot.  Yardages, very specific yardages were a part of my shot planning, not the whole part.  Picturing the flight of my shot, and where I wanted it to land were also part of that process.  As a almost fully visual learner/processor, the picture was the most important.  I would have the yardage on every shot for further info for that picture.


As a teacher
Part of my coaching is to learn how my students learn best.  Some are visual, some very mechanical (or pieces of a puzzle), some are feel, and every combination imaginable.
Knowing yardages their shots fly can be a serious data point, or simply an overall feel for tempo on specific clubs (i.e. My six iron flies 165, swing for thatbyardage I get my most consistent results)


For me,golf was competition, which is scores against a field.
For students it's everything from hitting a few more good shots a day, to trying to be their absolute best...it depends on them.

[Jon Wiggett]

AG,


I do not know whether it is more or less in keeping with the traditions of the game but I never made that point so would appreciate if you would stick to what I said when replying. As to whether judging distance is an added skill well I think anyone with a bit of commonsense knows it is harder to hit the ball the correct distance without the actual yardage and were this not the case I doubt players would waste the time finding the distance out.


As to whether Old Tom Morris and his contemporaries used yardage charts, paced out distances or the like. There are very extensive writings, articles and documents about golf by those playing in this era which go into great detail about what was usual practice at the time and having read quite a bit of it I have yet to come across anything indicating that this was ever done. Were it to be common practice as you suppose then this would certainly have been documented. That it has not been mentioned not only confirms it was not done but also shows it was never even conceived of. The onus is clearly on you to provide proof it did occur and until then I think we can safely discount it.


As a final thought on, players have always known what club they hit from certain points however and used this to help judge which club to use. This is the sort of template ability that any good player has and judging the distance with the help of aides is more skillful than been given the information of the exact distance.


Jon

Jon,
Thank you!  This the very first onus on me of 2017!

For the record, I have NO interest whatsoever in trying to prove that anybody in golf's past used yardages.  I just said that I can't imagine that they didn't.  Okee dokee?

It's too bad that a thread that was about which way or measuring yardage was best has devolved into a debate between the Flat Earth Society and people living in the 21st century.  I regret my part in that thread jack, and shall resign.

However, I want to announce to all concerned that on Wednesday, the next time that I will play golf instead of just typing about it and in honor of this thread, I intend to pace off the distance from the nearest sprinkler head, consult my yardage book, check my GPS watch, use my Bushnell laser, and consult the Arccos GPS program on my phone on EACH shot, including putts that have been conceded by my fellow competitors.  And in the case of discrepancies in the distance yielded by the four methods, I further intend to average the various numbers and select my club accordingly, not playing any shot until the conclusion of the math problems at hand.

All are welcome to join me.

First deny it, then brand all people who are not of your opinion as shortsighted, uneducated idiots and finally throw in a churlish last paragraph. Classy AG.

[A.G._Crockett]

AG,


I do not know whether it is more or less in keeping with the traditions of the game but I never made that point so would appreciate if you would stick to what I said when replying. As to whether judging distance is an added skill well I think anyone with a bit of commonsense knows it is harder to hit the ball the correct distance without the actual yardage and were this not the case I doubt players would waste the time finding the distance out.


As to whether Old Tom Morris and his contemporaries used yardage charts, paced out distances or the like. There are very extensive writings, articles and documents about golf by those playing in this era which go into great detail about what was usual practice at the time and having read quite a bit of it I have yet to come across anything indicating that this was ever done. Were it to be common practice as you suppose then this would certainly have been documented. That it has not been mentioned not only confirms it was not done but also shows it was never even conceived of. The onus is clearly on you to provide proof it did occur and until then I think we can safely discount it.


As a final thought on, players have always known what club they hit from certain points however and used this to help judge which club to use. This is the sort of template ability that any good player has and judging the distance with the help of aides is more skillful than been given the information of the exact distance.


Jon

Jon,
Thank you!  This the very first onus on me of 2017!

For the record, I have NO interest whatsoever in trying to prove that anybody in golf's past used yardages.  I just said that I can't imagine that they didn't.  Okee dokee?

It's too bad that a thread that was about which way or measuring yardage was best has devolved into a debate between the Flat Earth Society and people living in the 21st century.  I regret my part in that thread jack, and shall resign.

However, I want to announce to all concerned that on Wednesday, the next time that I will play golf instead of just typing about it and in honor of this thread, I intend to pace off the distance from the nearest sprinkler head, consult my yardage book, check my GPS watch, use my Bushnell laser, and consult the Arccos GPS program on my phone on EACH shot, including putts that have been conceded by my fellow competitors.  And in the case of discrepancies in the distance yielded by the four methods, I further intend to average the various numbers and select my club accordingly, not playing any shot until the conclusion of the math problems at hand.

All are welcome to join me.

First deny it, then brand all people who are not of your opinion as shortsighted, uneducated idiots and finally throw in a churlish last paragraph. Classy AG.

Thank you, Jon!  That's the first time in 2017 that I've been called "classy"!  (I'm choosing to ignore "churlish"...)

You seem a bit cranky the last couple of days; I hope that you can put some distance between you and whatever is bothering you.  Pun intended.

[Mark Pearce]

Personal experiences only.
As a player
I spent an enormous amount of time learning to hit shots the correct yardage.  When I missed shots the correct distance 1) I knew i was swinging well 2) I rarely got in round destroying trouble.  Distance control was my strength. 
I was very visually oriented, and very detail oriented in my notes during practice rounds.  I wanted to know where to land shots to have the ball end up in the correct spot.  Yardages, very specific yardages were a part of my shot planning, not the whole part.  Picturing the flight of my shot, and where I wanted it to land were also part of that process.  As a almost fully visual learner/processor, the picture was the most important.  I would have the yardage on every shot for further info for that picture.


As a teacher
Part of my coaching is to learn how my students learn best.  Some are visual, some very mechanical (or pieces of a puzzle), some are feel, and every combination imaginable.
Knowing yardages their shots fly can be a serious data point, or simply an overall feel for tempo on specific clubs (i.e. My six iron flies 165, swing for thatbyardage I get my most consistent results)


For me,golf was competition, which is scores against a field.
For students it's everything from hitting a few more good shots a day, to trying to be their absolute best...it depends on them.

Thank you.  That not only makes sense but also seems to ring true.  Frankly, these discussions are really a bit pointless.  While the rules allow the use of distance measuring devices some will use them, some will not.  So long as those that do do it quickly enough to not slow the game down then whey does anybody else care?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()