Slightly OT: PROVEN!!! GPS devices make players play faster

[Richard Choi]

There is a very interesting nugget of information on the latest issue of Golf Digest. They have a Hot List article around GPS devices with a following quote:

"Still not impressed? Well, consider pace of play. When the 2007 LPGA Teaching and Club Professional National Championship provided each competitor with a SkyCaddie GPS unit from industry leader SkyGolf, all three rounds were completed in less than five hours for the first time in the 20-year history of the event."

http://www.golfdigest.com/equipment/2009/01/gps

Will the purist concede that technology can help with the worst problem (at least for me) in golf today?

[Joe Hancock]

Not that any of of the parties involved would benefit from such a conclusive outcome.....

[Kalen Braley]

Richard,

No disrespect...but thats a backhanded compliment if I've ever heard one. Like telling a girl "Your real pretty for a fat chick".

For the vast majority of weekend warrior golfers this doesn't change anything.  They don't need to know its 153 to carry the bunker, 162 to the pin, and 174 to the back of the green.  All they need is a simple ballpark yardage which is easily gotten from a spinkler head or 150 post. I still maintain as has been said on here many times that the average joe who plays slow will play just as slow if not slower with one of these devices.  Faster play comes about from a changed mind-set not extra gadgets.

[Tom Huckaby]

Hell Richard, we've had evidence like this presented before.  The purists will just say this mkes painfully slow competitive players go a little faster.  Expecting concessions in here is a fool's game for sure.

It is nice to be proven right time and again though.  Good god did I get roasted for suggesting pace of play would improve in the massive thread when these were first legalized... and many times thereafter....

TH

ps - late add - see, Kalen stated the case!  Not that he's a purist.  And Kalen, in the end I tend to agree with you.  You just have to consider who's gonna buy and use one of these... it ain't the average joe.  I will take to my grave that for those inclined to buy them, the vast majority will speed up their play with the use.

[Garland Bayley]

The Golf Digest article would indicate there is some correlation between use of GPS devises and faster play by a certain class of players. However, it does not "prove" anything. In particular, it may be totally the wrong thing to get the fastest play from the vast majority of players.

If you apply rigorous experimental design and measurement, and come up with this result in a statistically significant way, then it will become accepted fact for the conditions of the experiments.

IMO, the primary reason for slow play is that most players do not understand that they are not good enough to play slow. I.e., they are not good enough to hit the ball the yardage given by the GPS device so there is no reason to consult it. They are not good enough to hit the putt on the proper line at the proper pace to justify an extensive read of a green, so there is no reason to do anything other than take a quick look at the line, quickly pick a target, and step up and hit the putt letting their subconscious do most of the work.

[Garland Bayley]

...You just have to consider who's gonna buy and use one of these... it ain't the average joe.  ...

Sorry Tom! Wrong as usual. Most foursomes of 20-30 handicappers that I play with have one of these. And the guys that have them think it is necessary for them to take the time to give measurements to those that don't. Half the time I have the shot on the way before they can give me the reading, so they give up on me.

[Tom Huckaby]

...You just have to consider who's gonna buy and use one of these... it ain't the average joe.  ...

Sorry Tom! Wrong as usual. Most foursomes of 20-30 handicappers that I play with have one of these. And the guys that have them think it is necessary for them to take the time to give measurements to those that don't. Half the time I have the shot on the way before they can give me the reading, so they give up on me.

Garland:

Our experience differs.  I have yet to see a user of these devices NOT be someone who wasn't slow already.  I do indeed believe that for damn near all - if not ALL - users, the effect is speeded up play.

I do not expect you to agree.

TH

[Patrick Kiser]

Bingo!  Totally depends on the user.

... faster play by a certain class of players.

[Garland Bayley]

...You just have to consider who's gonna buy and use one of these... it ain't the average joe.  ...

Sorry Tom! Wrong as usual. Most foursomes of 20-30 handicappers that I play with have one of these. And the guys that have them think it is necessary for them to take the time to give measurements to those that don't. Half the time I have the shot on the way before they can give me the reading, so they give up on me.

Garland:

Our experience differs.  I have yet to see a user of these devices NOT be someone who wasn't slow already.  I do indeed believe that for damn near all - if not ALL - users, the effect is speeded up play.

I do not expect you to agree.

TH

Tom,

Did you mean to post the above somewhere else? I don't see anywhere in it where you discuss the propensity of the "average joe" to buy one of these, which was the topic of my post.

[Kalen Braley]

I should add that I'm not a purist, and I have no problem with people using them.

For the people who actually use these as Tom points out, it does likely speed up play for them...but for the overall length it takes to play a round on your average muni, there are other factors at play which still account for slow rounds and its important not to confuse the two as I may have suggested in my 1st post.

[SL_Solow]

Garland, while you may be correct that most players don't benefit from an exact yardage (although some would argue that everyone benefits from a lack of doubt and a more precise target)  so long as they don't accept the premise, they will seek the information.  Therefore, the fastest means of getting it should speed up play.  GPs is generally faster than finding a marker and pacing off the difference.

[Tom Huckaby]

...You just have to consider who's gonna buy and use one of these... it ain't the average joe.  ...

Sorry Tom! Wrong as usual. Most foursomes of 20-30 handicappers that I play with have one of these. And the guys that have them think it is necessary for them to take the time to give measurements to those that don't. Half the time I have the shot on the way before they can give me the reading, so they give up on me.

Garland:

Our experience differs.  I have yet to see a user of these devices NOT be someone who wasn't slow already.  I do indeed believe that for damn near all - if not ALL - users, the effect is speeded up play.

I do not expect you to agree.

TH

Tom,

Did you mean to post the above somewhere else? I don't see anywhere in it where you discuss the propensity of the "average joe" to buy one of these, which was the topic of my post.

Not at all.  Just consider that "our experience differs" also applies to use of these by the average joe.  Your Joe must have a lot more money then the Joes I encounter.

But in any case, that matters not.  What does matter is that I do continue to believe that those who actually buy and use these do speed up their play, as they are slow to begin with.

And again, I don't expect you to agree with that.  Fair enough.  You'd just be wrong again, that's all.  

[mike_malone]

 The back and forth between caddie and player was eliminated.

   " How far to front?" 187 "Back?" 204 "Left?" 14 "Right?" 21. "Bathroom?" .....   

[Anthony Gray]

  I am a purist and I conceede they do speed up play. But also maintain a slow player will always be a slow player no matter what.

 Anthony

[Richard Choi]

Garland, while it is true this is not a rigorous scientific test, the evidence is still pretty compelling.

But your purists are missing the biggest weakness in the quote... GPS really only works (to speed up play) if EVERYONE on the course uses them. All it takes is one person on the golf course to slow everyone else.

[Melvyn Morrow]

Richard

Certainly seems to speed up play there Richard, under 5 hours – wow
Sorry, I will not concede, because there is nothing to concede.

My game is first of all not compromised, nor do I slow down to look for distance markers or fiddle with digital sat toys. As I approach the ball I have already decided my approach shot and have the right club in hand.

The whole advantage of walking is to being able to observe the surrounding landscape and course. I also am fortunate to be able to co-ordinate between my eyes and brain and do not need an artificial aid to give me distance. 

OK, it’s legal to use them on a course so use them if you must, switch off your brain and let something else do the calculating for you. Just sorry to read how many people need their toys to play a game of golf, but hell its only a game and if you need help to play it why should I care.

Call me what you want - a purist, I’m fine with that although I don’t see myself as one, just an ordinary guy playing the game using my OWN natural abilities, being true to myself and to the Spirit of the Game – but as I said that's my game.   

One thing I will say is that I have never taken 5 hours for a round – never. If I am going to be on a course for a day I will play a round in the morning and another in the afternoon, I do that because I want to enjoy my games.   

Under 5 hours – wow, well I expect you can say you get value for your money, might ruin the game, piss you off and perhaps loose the pleasure of playing but it certainly value for money with the added bonus that you did not have to think for yourself. 

Sounds like great fun, but before you settle for that come over and play golf at some of our great out of the way courses (by out of the way I means perhaps 10-20 miles approx.).  I would happily buy you a drink or two afterwards. 

Melvyn 

PS To use one of these aids would be like comparing me with Tom  - I would have had to experience a frontal Lobotomy – Tom that translated means a "frontal-lobe castration".

[Tom Huckaby]

Melvyn:

It is good to have you back, and I do mean that sincerely.

I just do continue to think you miss the point about all of this.

No one is suggesting these devices would be anything but a pox on the game you play over there.  Or at least I am not.

The suggestion is that over here, in the home of 5+ hour rounds, with the prevailing attitude too often being "I've paid my money and I'll take however long as I see fit", these are a necessary evil.

I do quite firmly believe that here in the States, those who buy them will go faster with their use.  They are in general painfully slow to begin with.

But in no way do I suggest they are a panacea, or anything close.  They just do tend to help things HERE.

It's also likely a given that all of us would LOVE to come over and play your game, and in fact most of us have, or will.

That too is not the point.  Your game is better, by such an extent it remains silly that you see fit to defend it.

We are just trying to deal with our reality over here.

TH

[Garland Bayley]

...
My game is first of all not compromised, nor do I slow down to look for distance markers or fiddle with digital sat toys. As I approach the ball I have already decided my approach shot and have the right club in hand.

... just an ordinary guy playing the game using my OWN natural abilities, being true to myself and to the Spirit of the Game – but as I said that's my game.   
...

BINGO!

I believe that If most people would trust their "natural abilities", they would play as well without having the yardages given by the GPS, as they would with them.

They have to understand that they are not good enough to play any differently than Melvyn plays.

If they are Ben Hogan, and practice hitting alternate shots 172 yards and 174 yards, then the GPS will be of a benefit. There a no Ben Hogans on this board.


Tom Huckaby, you are right. Our average joes are different. However, the additional topic you covered in your post made it impossible for me to understand that is what you meant.

[Garland Bayley]

Garland, while you may be correct that most players don't benefit from an exact yardage (although some would argue that everyone benefits from a lack of doubt and a more precise target)  so long as they don't accept the premise, they will seek the information.  Therefore, the fastest means of getting it should speed up play.  GPs is generally faster than finding a marker and pacing off the difference.

Shel,

If they don't benefit from the exact distance from a GPS, then how do they benefit from finding a marker and pacing off the distance?

See Melvyn above!

[Tom Huckaby]

Garland:

I was addressing the primary issue of this Topic.

My apologies if that was difficult for you to understand.

 

And you now miss the point as much as Melvyn does.

Take the markers off of all courses and after an adjustment period, hell yes the game would be better.  One and all would learn to use their senses, and that would not only be more fun, but would make for another skill-set to be learned, or taken advantage of by those who excel at it.  Either way that's good for the game.  Again I doubt anyone would argue against this.

That just has zero chance of happening in the US and dare I say anywhere else as the game has become.  So you two seem to be arguing for a game that I believe most see as better... but just that has no chance of ever being implemented... so I continue to fail to see the point.

And Melvyn, there was a thread on the Old Macdonald course up here while you were gone.  You simply must read it.  I argued for no markings there and was decried as the purist.

 

[Melvyn Morrow]

Tom

Calm down, fully understand, you blame your education system for the slow thinking hence the need for theses aids. I can follow that, but it’s not for me to comment.

As for 5 hours – with my Scottish blood that should be great news but I want enjoyment as well and real value for money is a double round (even if it kills me).

Smile and use a cart to keep cool

Melvyn

[Tom Huckaby]

Tom

Calm down, fully understand, you blame your education system for the slow thinking hence the need for theses aids. I can follow that, but it’s not for me to comment.

As for 5 hours – with my Scottish blood that should be great news but I want enjoyment as well and real value for money is a double round (even if it kills me).

Smile and use a cart to keep cool

Melvyn

Melvyn:

I can't see where I made any comment on our educational system; I just reported how things are.  And sadly that is how things are here far too often.

But your last line is indeed worthwhile:  smile and use a cart is what I do, on mountainous courses, overly crowded courses, or those times when it would be just plain stupid to walk.  That's a lot of my golf; and a lot of the golf other people here play as well.  And it ain't gonna change.

Anyway the point remains not which game is better and which we should strive for - it's YOUR GAME, beyond a shadow of a doubt.

The point here is what can we really do to make our game more palatable?

To me, the swifter play that these devices allows for makes the game more palatable.  Thus I find little use in utterly crying them downe.

TH

[Garland Bayley]

Garland:

I was addressing the primary issue of this Topic.

My apologies if that was difficult for you to understand.

 

You responded to a post that quoted a very small portion of your earlier post and addressed it directly. Therefore, the context had clearly been narrowed and there was no need to address the primary issue of this topic.

And you now miss the point as much as Melvyn does.

Take the markers off of all courses and after an adjustment period, hell yes the game would be better.  One and all would learn to use their senses, and that would not only be more fun, but would make for another skill-set to be learned, or taken advantage of by those who excel at it.  Either way that's good for the game.  Again I doubt anyone would argue against this.

That just has zero chance of happening in the US and dare I say anywhere else as the game has become.  So you two seem to be arguing for a game that I believe most see as better... but just that has no chance of ever being implemented... so I continue to fail to see the point.

No, you miss the point. It does not matter if there are distance markers on the course or not. If the golfer understands that he is not good enough to need exact distance, he will understand he does not need to get exact distance by pacing, or GPS, or Bushnell, or whatever. If the golfer can understand that he is nowhere close to those robots he sees on TV, he can forgo all the measurement nonsense, and the putt reading nonsense he sees on TV. It's a golfer education problem!

And Melvyn, there was a thread on the Old Macdonald course up here while you were gone.  You simply must read it.  I argued for no markings there and was decried as the purist.

 

[Melvyn Morrow]

Tom

Things change, people make things change, but you have to feel it worth the hassle to push for change. Yes you have a way of playing golf that is not my way.

It’s down to the individual to stand up for his opinions. Giving up because you believe it’s a waste of time is not a good enough reason, give up because you do not care, well yes I can understand that. 

Perhaps I have a bit of Robert the Bruce in me and keep watching that spider who never gives up. My way of golf maybe a thing of the past but I will fight to retain it, I will not give up. Slowly, slowly, little, by little that’s the way – at least I will do down fighting with my sword (5 Iron) in hand which will allow me in to my Valhalla – no regrets, I may well fail but as long as I did my best that is all we can ever ask.  Yes I do understand, I just don’t easily throw in the towel.

But again that’s my way, it may not be yours - Our most important and harshest critic is ourselves.

Melvyn

[Tom Huckaby]

Garland:  I do appreciate the festive colors used.

Please do report how you plan to re-educate all golfers to forego distance information; that is also after you report how you are going to get all courses to remove the markings they have (thus removing the temptation for your re-educated golfers); and how you are going to put the genie of electronic information back in the bottle.

If you can make that all work, then again, I am right with you; as I say the game would be better for it.

I am just not holding my breath this will happen.  So while I am allowed to breathe, I'd prefer to address matters based in reality.

TH