USGA bans distance devices at its events!

« **Reply #25 on:** November 10, 2005, 02:57:56 PM »

Is the basis for this action the fact that many courses have GPS monitors on their carts and this caused an issue as far as submitting scores for handicap purposes?

« **Reply #26 on:** November 10, 2005, 03:39:43 PM »

AGC: thanks. Every so often something makes sense to me. Even less often I am able to convey this to others. It is a banner day. But we'll see what the future holds.

JES:

I have to believe that is one of the issues. As you know, so many courses are going to GPS on carts - golfers love it - and before it was very grey as to whether rounds played using such were eligible for posting. But also keep in mind that in any competitive event, courses were required to turn the GPS off - it was crystal clear GPS couldn't be used in competitive play. Many issues came up with this, as too many times some carts had it off, some didn't, some courses were unable to turn them off completely, etc. It just made for all sorts of strange happenings. Now that's not THAT big of a deal overall, and not a good enough reason to make the rule change - but I have to believe it is ONE of the factors.

I'd guess the most important factor is that so much golf is played using GPS anyway, and courses are SO well-marked as it is, that it seemed silly to fight it for regular play and for events where GPS carts were used. The way to allow this, while still preserving the integrity of the game at the highest levels, was to allow it only as a local rule.

PT - I guess nothing I can say can get you to accept this. Rest assured most here were with you when this came up before. I personally just see it as much ado about nothing - allowing it as a local rule does make sense to me.

TH

« **Reply #27 on:** November 10, 2005, 03:40:47 PM »

How is the R & A handling this?

How are current courses in the UK marked for yardages? Is there a correlation to pace of play that should/could be observed?

What percentage of golfers maintain handicaps through the USGA?

Has anyone recently tried to eye-ball your yardages to see how much difference it makes?

Could the use of distance measuring devices be factored in to the handicapping formula so as to weight their percieved benefits? Would this cause a lawsuit against the USGA?

Seems an odd move to me, allowing them at all.

« **Reply #28 on:** November 10, 2005, 03:48:18 PM »

Thanks Tom,

I agree that, if they are to be allowed at all, the local rule avenue makes perfect sense.

Is it fair to say that these instruments fall into the category many people claim the newest clubs and balls have created; the better you are, the more beneficial these things will be.

« **Reply #29 on:** November 10, 2005, 03:48:55 PM »

How is the R & A handling this?
I really don't know. Sorry.

How are current courses in the UK marked for yardages? Is there a correlation to pace of play that should/could be observed?
My experience is they are way less well-marked than our US courses. Quite a few have no markings at all. Thus the clamor for technological help may be greater over there.

What percentage of golfers maintain handicaps through the USGA?
I guess that would depend on how you define "golfer." My guess is that of those who play more than 20 rounds a year, maybe a third? But a better question is why does this matter? The USGA makes rules for those who do have a handicap, for the most part. If you don't have one, oh you still matter, but the rules don't cater to you.

Has anyone recently tried to eye-ball your yardages to see how much difference it makes?
Yes, all the time. A big part of course rating is getting distances correct. We do this all the time... try to guess the distances before we use the bushnell. I suck at it and I am rarely more than a yard or two off eyeballing, and pacing off I almost always get within a yard or so also. Meanwhile we take 5 minutes to get the busnhell distance exactly right. This is a big reason why I think bushnell's are REALLY not worth the effort.

Could the use of distance measuring devices be factored in to the handicapping formula so as to weight their percieved benefits? Would this cause a lawsuit against the USGA?
How could you possibly do that? Can you weigh the percentage of help for ANY part of what goes into hitting a golf shot? I have no idea about the legal ramifications. But anyway, I really fail to see the worth of even doing this. No harm is done to anyone by having this as a local rule.

Seems an odd move to me, allowing them at all.
Seems very normal and logical to me. But to each his own.

« **Reply #30 on:** November 10, 2005, 03:51:09 PM »

Quote from: JES II on November 10, 2005, 03:48:18 PM

Thanks Tom,

I agree that, if they are to be allowed at all, the local rule avenue makes perfect sense.

Is it fair to say that these instruments fall into the category many people claim the newest clubs and balls have created; the better you are, the more beneficial these things will be.

I'd agree with that wholeheartedly. It just comes down to control over the golf ball. The better you are, the more it will matter that it's exactly 175 to carry a bunker, 152 to the middle of the green, etc.

The problem is though that I have a feeling the worse a golfer is, the more he'll WANT to use these things. Here's hoping a strict rein is held on the local rule.

TH

« **Reply #31 on:** November 10, 2005, 04:14:10 PM »

"How is the R & A handling this?"

Sully:

The Rules of Golf, all of them, playing Rules, Local Rules in Appendix I and I&B Rules in Appendix II and III and basically including amateur status rules are pretty much entirely unified between the USGA/R&A. So, the R&A recognizes the inclusion of the "measuring device" Local Rule that will come into effect in Jan, 2006. There is very, very little difference between the USGA and R&A today in all these Rules things. One of the most recent differences was for quite some time they had the Local Rule on removing stones from bunkers and in the spirit of unity the USGA adopted that the last time around. One notable difference right now is the R&A has decided it's OK to win things like a $100,000 Hummer for a hole in one because they decided to define a hole in one as luck not skill. The USGA hasn't agreed to that yet.

But if you win a $100,000 Hummer in a hole in One contest just take the keys to the damn thing and drive it home and ditch your amateur status. When you get home just call me up, I'll make a few phone calls and you'll have your am status back by the end of the week. The only other thing you need to do is send me a couple cases of nice wine but that shouldn't be too painful particularly seeing as you've got yourself an nice new $100,000 Hummer.

« **Reply #32 on:** November 10, 2005, 04:18:51 PM »

See Tom, that's my issue with allowing them at all. Their will be a period of time in which golfers of all levels will want to use these things. The ones they can actually help will realize quite soon that the help is negligible. the lesser player will not realize it so soon and the negatives of using them during the round continue.

I brought up the UK because my instinct was that their courses are "less well-marked" than here in the states and I find that a good thing for both the players sense of challenge and more importantly pace of play. When you have nothing to fall back on (sprinkler head yardages, 150 stakes, Bushnells etc...) you develop better golf skills. Not ball striking and putting, but understanding the game and the course. I can't speak absolutely, but we always hear about the speed of rounds in the UK versus here, will this rule change help us get closer to them in this regard?

The handicap question is based on me wondering how many people this really effects. I understand the cart loaded GPS issues and that's what prompted my legal question, but it seems this is trying to please some segment of the population and I just don't get it. When you say they make their rules for those with handicaps, I wonder if this is a way to appease people prior to, or counter to, equipment regulations.

Are they trying so hard to maintain consistency in their rules that they will open a pandoras box that someday might take all improvisation and creativity out of the game?

« **Reply #33 on:** November 10, 2005, 04:34:19 PM »

JES:

These are very difficult - and very valid - questions.

My feeling is there will be a honeymoon period where every Joe Q. Hack will want a bushnell, and Joe Q. Rich will want a GPS device, and they will proudly show them off for their friends and overuse the crap out of them. But as devoted to new toys as he might be, each of these Joe Qs are not stupid. He'll see the tiny if any benefit they give, the pain they are to use, and they''ll go into his bag with the ball retriever, to be used with about as much frequency.

So "this is gonna cause slow play" arguments to me have a bit of chicken little to them. Oh, such might occur in the short-term. But in the long term we'll be fine and it may well even decrease time of play as those devoted to the devices learn better when to use them, and HOW to use them.

As for the rest, well... golf has never been very good at holding back technology, and to me it's debatable whether we should even try. Oh sure, we have to keep a reign on things somewhat - but of course the counterargument to all of this is why aren't you still using hickories and featheries?

This was all argued before. Many here have the take that while going back to hickories and featheries is an extreme even they won't go to, they do want technology reined in better. They don't like any allowance of these distance-help devices because they find it an affront to the game and another path on the slippery slope to all skill being taken from the game.

I am sympathetic to that argument. I just don't buy it, as it pertains to these devices. Because to me, they still don't help one hit the golf shot. And with courses as well marked as they are, all skill in estimating distance has been rendered pretty moot. Perhaps I'd think differently if I were a UK golfer where markings aren't as common... but Rich Goodale tells me bushnells and the like are all the rage over there, also.

It seems the genie is out of the bottle when it comes to getting distances correct and accurate - on both sides of the atlantic. It's not going back in.

And that being the case, well to me the local rule seems a fair compromise.

You'll notice again I didn't adress the legal issues. Such may well be driving this. But for one I don't think bushnell or any GPS company has that kind of clout... not like the equipment makers anyway... and for another, I just do think the other reasons here and practicality carry far more weight.

TH

« **Reply #34 on:** November 10, 2005, 04:34:40 PM »

Quote from: TEPaul on November 10, 2005, 04:14:10 PM

"How is the R & A handling this?"

Sully:

The Rules of Golf, all of them, playing Rules, Local Rules in Appendix I and I&B Rules in Appendix II and III and basically including amateur status rules are pretty much entirely unified between the USGA/R&A. So, the R&A recognizes the inclusion of the "measuring device" Local Rule that will come into effect in Jan, 2006. There is very, very little difference between the USGA and R&A today in all these Rules things. One of the most recent differences was for quite some time they had the Local Rule on removing stones from bunkers and in the spirit of unity the USGA adopted that the last time around. One notable difference right now is the R&A has decided it's OK to win things like a $100,000 Hummer for a hole in one because they decided to define a hole in one as luck not skill. The USGA hasn't agreed to that yet.

But if you win a $100,000 Hummer in a hole in One contest just take the keys to the damn thing and drive it home and ditch your amateur status. When you get home just call me up, I'll make a few phone calls and you'll have your am status back by the end of the week. The only other thing you need to do is send me a couple cases of nice wine but that shouldn't be too painful particularly seeing as you've got yourself an nice new $100,000 Hummer.

Funny story about that Tom,

As you may know, I regained my amateur status on September 1 and this past weekend played in a charity outing at Springfield Country Club. Well obviously on the one hole they had a car for any holes-in-one I hit the ball about 6 inches away. As broke as I am, I can honestly say I would not have accepted the car (let the onslaught begin). That is not to say I would not have looked for a way to turn that $35,000 car into enough wine to fill up your garage

.

« **Reply #35 on:** November 10, 2005, 04:39:58 PM »

Sully:

The probable reason this rule change was made (to institute the Local Rule) was simply that there are so many of those devices that were out there anyway. Obviously the USGA/R&A decided to institute the Local Rule to make all that illegality legal if various "Committees" (which can technically be clubs, golf associations, tournament committees etc) want to use that Local Rule. But the Local Rule in this case is the way to go since it allows any "Committee" to simply state they will not be using the Local Rule which in effect means that measuring devices are still not allowed within the Rules of Golf because it is my understanding that Rule 14-3b which makes measuring devices not allowable in golf under penalty of disqualification will remain in the Rule Book, at least for now. I think in effect this new local rule just gives "committees" the option of "excepting" Rule 14-3b.

Sully, for your information, not long ago John Vander B mentioned on here that he'd heard that Pebble Beach had begun using measuring devices and they found that they actually picked up five tee times in a day. That would be about 40-50 minutes in a day.

"As broke as I am, I can honestly say I would not have accepted the car (let the onslaught begin)."

WHAT??? WHY NOT? OK, how about if I'd made a few more phone calls and got you your am status back the NEXT day instead of by the end of the week? Speaking of getting cars, did you ever hear about that time my old pro at Piping Rock, Tom Nieporte, won the Bob Hope and in addition to his winner's check he got the keys to a shiny new car. On the air during the awards Tom turned to Bob Hope and said: "Mr Hope, I have eleven children, do you think you could see to it that I could get a van instead of that car?"

« **Reply #36 on:** November 10, 2005, 04:42:38 PM »

I thought the USGA did change the rule on hole in one prizes.

Anyway, doesn't the local rule that prompted this thread imply that the tournament game isn't the same rules-wise as the recreational game, and that the tournament ball is just around the corner?

« **Reply #37 on:** November 10, 2005, 04:49:43 PM »

George - they did. You can go ahead and accept that Chysler Cordoba now, rich Corinthian leather and all.

As for the bifurcation between tournament and casual play, this is a strong sign. We'll see if the next domino is a tournament ball. Obviously the legal issues there are a LOT more difficult.

TH

« **Reply #38 on:** November 10, 2005, 04:59:19 PM »

Quote from: Tom Huckaby on November 10, 2005, 03:48:55 PM

Has anyone recently tried to eye-ball your yardages to see how much difference it makes?
Yes, all the time. A big part of course rating is getting distances correct. We do this all the time... try to guess the distances before we use the bushnell. I suck at it and I am rarely more than a yard or two off eyeballing, and pacing off I almost always get within a yard or so also. Meanwhile we take 5 minutes to get the busnhell distance exactly right. This is a big reason why I think bushnell's are REALLY not worth the effort.

Sorry boys,

Tom and Tom,

Has the above concept disappeared for good? I guess Tom Huckaby refers to this with the genie out of the bottle. Isn't that one of the traits that should separate levels of play?

"Sully, for your information, not long ago John Vander B mentioned on here that he'd heard that Pebble Beach had begun using measuring devices and they found that they actually picked up five tee times in a day. That would be about 40-50 minutes in a day. "

What is that, about 10%

?

« **Reply #39 on:** November 10, 2005, 05:03:59 PM »

Sully:

Well, we SHOULD place a premium on driving skill also. But that's gone to a large extent with the HUGELY forgiving drivers today as well... and that genie too isn't going back in.

Look, the only way you make distance estimating relevant again is to ban all markings on courses. I know some courses have taken it upon themselves to do that, and that's great - but even they tend to have caddies, effectively defeating the purpose.

Sully in a perfect world, all courses would be like that. The sad fact is, they are way way way less than 1%.

The markings are here, people rely on them, that isn't going to change.

TH

« **Reply #40 on:** November 10, 2005, 05:41:40 PM »

I wouldn't get too excited about the "purity" of the UK courses re distance markings. My recollection is that those without markings or with markings in code were looking to sell the strokesaver.

« **Reply #41 on:** November 10, 2005, 07:28:27 PM »

My problem with yardage devices is that there use introduces a mechanical device which helps the player determine how he plays the shot. No other device has ever been allowed. The horse is out of the barn; there is no going back.

How will various competitive bodies react? Here are my predictions:

All professional tours: Immeadiate use ($$$$)

R&A: not in '06

Masters: not in '06, but will introduce before the USGA or R&A

Colleges: yes in '06 (coaches will certainly vote to approve their use.)

State and regional associaitons: about 25% next year, growing rapidly.

Clubs: immediately

The USGA and R&A will probably experiment in Amateurs or Senior Opens before allowing use in all events, but that will probably happen within five years as yardage device technology improves and prices go down.

Can you imagine watching an Open Championship at a venerable links site, and seeing a competitor using one of these things? Makes me really love blind shots. (Now there's a good topic: how will player use of these devices change how golf courses are designed? Is the blind shot dead except at course with GPS?)

JESII: There is no effect on course rating with these devices. Players already get pretty accurate yardages.

There are about 6mm golfers with USGA handicaps, approximately 1/4 of all golfers by NGF definition.

« **Reply #42 on:** November 10, 2005, 07:43:27 PM »

Jim, I disagree with your comment that the tours will use them immediately. I believe the Finchem already said they wouldn't, but I might be wrong. Many mini-tours will. At least one used them this year in defiance of the previous ban. Their claim was that the players didn't have caddies so this sped up play.

As for the USGA having a local rule and then not using it and that some people think this is somehow hypocritical, there are many local rules in the rule book that the USGA doesn't use. That is why they are local rules. See my comment on Geoff's original article for a list of ones I don't think they've ever used or have only used sparingly.

The best example of that is "preferred lies" or "winter rules." The USGA has never and will never use them, but the rule is there for those who feel they have the need (like the PGA Tour every time a drop of rain is forecast.)

As for the R&A allowing lasers. They have the same local rule (it isn't a US only decision as some are). But, the reason this wasn't in there before was that they didn't want it and held it up for a while. I doubt very very very much that you'll ever see them at an Open Championship.

We just got a new Nikon for course rating and measurement that is better than our Bushnell. It is smaller, more accurate and easier to use.

« **Reply #43 on:** November 10, 2005, 10:21:51 PM »

Quote from: Jim Sweeney on November 10, 2005, 07:28:27 PM

My problem with yardage devices is that there use introduces a mechanical device which helps the player determine how he plays the shot. No other device has ever been allowed. The horse is out of the barn; there is no going back.

Jim,

Just curious...

How exactly does a yardage measuring device help to determine how a player hits a shot? This device would simply tell the player the yardage. I could get the same exact yardage as the device by checking the nearest yardage marker, like a sprinkler head. This is only a part of the total equation in determining what type of shot I want to hit.

What's the difference if my "laser guided" or GPS device tells me I'm 164 yds. to the hole or if I pace it off the old fashioned way? Yards are still yards, no matter the way to measure them.

« **Reply #44 on:** November 11, 2005, 12:47:14 AM »

Quote from: JSlonis on November 10, 2005, 12:39:07 PM

I do agree...times do change. eventually we'll all be given a pocketsize GPS unit on the first tee that will be able to track us all over the course.

We're already there. Some of the newer GSM phones have GPS capability built in, per some new government rule about tracking 911 callers (can't remember the exact details, but it will become more and more prevalent in phones) Of course the accuracy of GPS receivers is mostly dependent on the accuracy of their timekeeping, and the crystals in those things is probably even worse than the cheapo $200 receivers you can buy at Best Buy, so it'd be accurate to maybe 4 or 5 yards. Good enough for most of us. The pros or independently wealthy GCA readers can purchase a survey grade GPS receiver that's accurate to within millimeters for about $25K, but I doubt it will fit in your pocket...

To really make it really work for exact distances to the pin without a pro-style pinsheet you'd just need a differential transmitter in each flagstick. Need a bit of electronics and a power source. Solar power with a few batteries to get you by on cloudy days should do nicely. Probably would work better at Merion than most other courses however

« **Reply #45 on:** November 11, 2005, 01:08:23 AM »

Makes perfect sense to me!

Allowing them at "local option" is accepting reality, but not an admission that the game played at high competition level is caving in to more "modern technology making the game easier"--

What did not make sense to me was when the Local Rule option was announced a belief that the USGA would permit their use in any of the their competitons (or even recommend their use)-

The GPS system used on many resort courses is more a device to assist the management in keeping track of groups location on the course (and sometimes maintence carts also) rather than assisting players with yardage-- The USGA recognized that with such systems being widely used on resort courses -- and having announced rounds played with such systems in place would be acceptable for handicap purposes (a decison made about 12 years ago) they should permit clubs to allow their use without branding play at that course as "illegal".

Having permitted that, however, does not mean that the USGA believes the "game" played at the highest level should permit such devices--and that determination of yardage is still not a skill that is a part of the game--

To impose certain standards for "top competition" vs everyday play is not unusual-- The "one ball condition", part of the competition "hard cards" is just such an example--

Many courses will bar such devices for their competitions, but make clear that for everyday play such devices are not frowned on (so if someone pulls one out in everyday play someone can not yell "cheater").

« **Reply #46 on:** November 11, 2005, 01:48:43 AM »

Quote from: Doug Siebert on November 11, 2005, 12:47:14 AM

To really make it really work for exact distances to the pin without a pro-style pinsheet.....

Doug

Today you will be given a GPS-measured "pro-style pinsheet" for free when you walk on the first tee of a number of courses in the UK, including the Old Course.....

« **Reply #47 on:** November 11, 2005, 08:17:30 AM »

The title of this topic is wrong. The USGA did not ban distance devices in their events. They chose not to allow them.

That is an important difference that any course or committee must realize. If they are not specifically allowed by stating that the local rule is in force, they are not allowed and anyone using one in a competition is DQ'ed.

« **Reply #48 on:** November 11, 2005, 09:22:36 AM »

Quote from: John Vander Borght on November 11, 2005, 08:17:30 AM

The title of this topic is wrong. The USGA did not ban distance devices in their events. They chose not to allow them.

That is an important difference that any course or committee must realize. If they are not specifically allowed by stating that the local rule is in force, they are not allowed and anyone using one in a competition is DQ'ed.

JohnV,
Exactly so, and this is what is so confusing about the logic of all of this. If the USGA doesn't want such handheld devices used, then say so, and with a period at the end of the sentence. Why the confusion of the local rule? I understand the issues of the GPS situation vis-a-vis carts at some courses; why not just deal with them by simply allowing of disallowing GPS systems provided by the course on golf carts per se? Why get into the handheld issue at all, and then turn around and say "But NOT in our events!" Weird chain of reasoning, to say the least.

« **Reply #49 on:** November 11, 2005, 09:43:58 AM »

Quote from: A.G._Crockett on November 11, 2005, 09:22:36 AM

Why the confusion of the local rule? I understand the issues of the GPS situation vis-a-vis carts at some courses; why not just deal with them by simply allowing of disallowing GPS systems provided by the course on golf carts per se? Why get into the handheld issue at all, and then turn around and say "But NOT in our events!" Weird chain of reasoning, to say the least.

I think the issue you address (cart mounted GPS vs. Hand held device being bunched together) in this ruling is due to some courses having the hand held device mounted to their carts as their option for this type of offering.

I think Dennis Harwood turned me on this one, I can see their reasoning.

p.s. Tom Huckaby, maybe you made all those points yesterday and I was not as receptive, sorry. At least I helped your post count a little.

News:

JESII

THuckaby2

JESII

JESII

THuckaby2

THuckaby2

TEPaul

JESII

THuckaby2

JESII

TEPaul

George Pazin

THuckaby2

JESII

THuckaby2

Jim_Bick

Jim Sweeney

JohnV

JSlonis

Doug Siebert

Dennis_Harwood

ForkaB

JohnV

A.G._Crockett

JESII