[Mike Benham]

The skill of visually estimating distances is a heck of a lot easier to master then the ability to hit a golf that exact distance time and time again.

[Craig Sweet]

Sean...

So distance will not figure into your shot at all?

[Craig Sweet]

Sean...

I am not confusing any issue...firm or slow it does not matter, what club used does not matter....at some point I have to figure out where I want the ball to land so it comes to rest where I want it to...hopefully closer to the hole.

What part of figuring out what that distance is is not "measuring" distance?  You don't need a range finder or a sprinkler head, to calculate how you will hit the shot to make the ball travel the "distance" you think it should travel to give you the desired result.

[Melvyn Morrow]

John

I understand you position on a well know course and experience on new, un-played before courses. However, I just need to look and observe then decide my club, no input is wanted or needed re yardage information. I still look at golf as a challenge so I want to step up to the mark, yardage is just not in my mind at all as I trust in myself. Of course I get it wrong, from a poor shoot, not taking into account the course, conditions, weather, state of fairways and greens, etc but is that not part of the game and its challenges?

The point is that while you and many others are in need of this information many of us believe it is part of the game and challenge of golf to decide for ourselves what club we use and play the shot accordingly.

Is it skill or just call it an eye for the game. That which comes naturally is why I have played golf.

Tell me, if I called out different yardage on say ten times will your ball each time come to rest on or within a few inches of that spot or will you pepper the area. Then of course let’s not forget on a new course you may not notice the lay or conditions of the Greens – does this not also have a bearing on how your ball reacts? In other words can you honestly tell me that the majority of times with your yardage information you can hit the sweet spot time after time?

Who is having the most fun? I don’t know but I am certainly playing golf by using my eyes, body and senses thus achieving some feeling of inner satisfaction. Again a good enough reason for playing it in the first place. Also this is how the game was taught to me, noting I have a long line of golfers in my family.

Can’t get your mind around not using yardage, then don’t bother clearly its not your way of playing golf. If you feel you or your game needs some help, if it’s legal and available it’s down to you to use it or not. I, like many do not think in yardage so see no need for it so don’t use it. My mind is on getting that ball in the hole - the ground you have to cover to do that is just ground - distance is all in the mind (for some).

The point is that if we don’t need it why do you. There must be a reason, but that you business.

Yardage has no validity in my game, but it does perhaps in yours and others.

Melvyn     

[Rich Goodale]

Correctomundo, Craig

Fast and firm has absolutely nothing to do with this issue, and even if it did, there is little evidence that golf courses were faster and firmer in ye olden days--in fact, the opposite was probably true.

Rich

[John Burzynski]

John

I understand you position on a well know course and experience on new, un-played before courses. However, I just need to look and observe then decide my club, no input is wanted or needed re yardage information. I still look at golf as a challenge so I want to step up to the mark, yardage is just not in my mind at all as I trust in myself. Of course I get it wrong, from a poor shoot, not taking into account the course, conditions, weather, state of fairways and greens, etc but is that not part of the game and its challenges?

The point is that while you and many others are in need of this information many of us believe it is part of the game and challenge of golf to decide for ourselves what club we use and play the shot accordingly.

Is it skill or just call it an eye for the game. That which comes naturally is why I have played golf.

Tell me, if I called out different yardage on say ten times will your ball each time come to rest on or within a few inches of that spot or will you pepper the area. Then of course let’s not forget on a new course you may not notice the lay or conditions of the Greens – does this not also have a bearing on how your ball reacts? In other words can you honestly tell me that the majority of times with your yardage information you can hit the sweet spot time after time?

Who is having the most fun? I don’t know but I am certainly playing golf by using my eyes, body and senses thus achieving some feeling of inner satisfaction. Again a good enough reason for playing it in the first place. Also this is how the game was taught to me, noting I have a long line of golfers in my family.

Can’t get your mind around not using yardage, then don’t bother clearly its not your way of playing golf. If you feel you or your game needs some help, if it’s legal and available it’s down to you to use it or not. I, like many do not think in yardage so see no need for it so don’t use it. My mind is on getting that ball in the hole - the ground you have to cover to do that is just ground - distance is all in the mind (for some).

The point is that if we don’t need it why do you. There must be a reason, but that you business.

Yardage has no validity in my game, but it does perhaps in yours and others.

Melvyn    

Yardage adds a general validity to my game.  I don't seem to be able to perceive differences in yardage very well outside of say 100 or so yards.    Frankly, 160 and 180 look the same to me.

Now granted, I am probably not accurate from there to within +/-  10 yards even on my best days, but it is helpful to know that if I am 160 out I am using my 5 iron and 180 my hybrid.    Granted I might still skull it 130, and knowing I am 153 or 157 out makes me no difference as I am not that accurate, but it does help plus or minus 10 or 20 yards.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Dave,
You have every right to see yourself as playing the 'Cliff's Notes' version of the game, but the real 'pig-headed' belief that's been expressed here is that your 'vision' (one expressed by a couple others) is somehow  superior to those held by others.

It's an exercise in egotistical and arrogant nonsense

 

[Sean_A]

Sean...

So distance will not figure into your shot at all?

I never said anything like distance wasn't important.  Of course hitting the ball the right distance is and was important.  The question is how does one ascertain what the right distance is?  This would include the flight and the roll - which imo takes a lot of skill to judge accurately.  With aerial and yardage dominated game of today golfers just look up the yardage and pick their club to match the yardage.  They are not often required to figure out how that distance is effected by the roll.  In the old days, golfers had to read the land and come up with a distance which included the effect of the roll or even if there would be an effect.  So from this PoV f&f conditions make a huge difference on the ascertaining distance because much of that distance is achieved after the ball lands.  The advent of consistent playing conditions as fed directly into the aerial & yardage game that so many folks on this site find boring to watch.  It is much easier to hit the right yardage if roll isn't involved.  This is why watching the Open is usually far more entertaining than other events.  

Rich, if you think courses were slower back in the day before irrigation than you just haven't played enough non irrigation golf.  

Ciao    

[John Burzynski]

I don't use anything more than sprinkler heads or 150 yard bushes provided by the course.  Lasers or GPS, while nice and techie (and I LOVE HI-TECH), would do nothing for me; my iron game is not accurate to plus or minus 1 yard or even 5 or 10 yards most days.    If I know I am 160 out and use my 5 iron, I might hit is 150 or 170 depending on my swing (of course not counting variables like wind and such).  Just from a traditional standpoint, GPS and laser seem to be where I draw the line for myself.

I suppose it may be viewed as the Cliff's Notes version using even sprinkler heads, but even the pros use and have for years used yardage books and the like.    It is not pure like the 17th century shepherds played golf, but the next closest thing to it.

[C. Squier]

But we all ought to know that when we rely on artificial aids to help us play the game, we're not really "playing the Game."  We're playing the Cliff's Notes version.

Come on Dave, how many people have you met that have said "man, I really had fun guessing those yardages out there today, what a great time!"  I will concede all day long that playing sans yardage help is a higher level of golf.  However, it's just slightly higher.  My first few rounds as a member at OFCC were after they replaced the sprinkler heads on the North, I flew solo for 2 months or so.  Was it satisfying hitting shots pin high all day?  Absolutely, very satisfying.  But once the heads were finally remarked, if you're going to peek on purpose or accidentally just once in the round, might as well do it the entire time.  If you don't, it's like using a calculator for just half a math test.  

I'd cherish the opportunity to play a course (great or not) without ANY yardage help.  None at all.  But going out pretending the barber pole in the middle of the fairway means nothing doesn't do it for me.  All or nothing.  

Ralph - I hear your argument, the game IS certainly different.  From what I have read (and I could be wrong!) the clubs used weren't specially suited for 10 yard distance gaps like they are today.  The specialization came from within 130 yards or so.  At that distance, it is much easier to eyeball a distance or feel than it is from 230 yards.  150 years ago, nobody was really concerned about getting home from 230 yards, much as we don't care what club we hit from 330 today.  I think it's fair to say that less aid was needed from 130 yards than 230 yards.

[Kalen Braley]

Shiv,

Agreed.

Just like all those lawyers who think they are doing good in the world by sueing everyone right? 

[Kyle Harris]

Dave,

The "game" as you call it is about maneuvering a golf ball from point A to B in the fewest possible strokes.

Nothing more, nothing less.

Cue: Argument from the absurd followed by Slippery Slope. Dave Schmidt!

[Jim_Kennedy]

Jim, it's not a question of superiority............Folks who want to play half the game are free to play half the game.-Shivas

I rest my case.

[Kyle Harris]

Dave,

The "game" as you call it is about maneuvering a golf ball from point A to B in the fewest possible strokes.

Nothing more, nothing less.

Cue: Argument from the absurd followed by Slippery Slope. Dave Schmidt!

Actually, Kyle, it there weren't plenty more, we wouldn't have 30 some odd rules about how - so there actually is something more. 

Why oh why did I immediately bring up the rules book when I posted that. But you get my point.

Your argument is that the game is somehow broken because of the presence of distance information, right?

I propose we have a Point/Counterpoint In My Opinion write-off. I'll take the pro distance information, and you take the con, or we can switch. I don't typically use yardages unless it's my first go with the course and I probably won't be back.

[Jim_Kennedy]

No Dave, it doesn't matter who said it first, you gained ownership of it when you included it in the body of your reply, sans quotation marks, as any fair reading of your post would imply.


edit: It'd be hard for me to answer that with my head over the railing.

[PCCraig]

Right, John.

In other words, you're not relying on your own distance-judging skills to pull a club.  You're relying on artificial aids to assist you.  And IMO, not to mention noted authority Pat Craig  , you're therefore only playing half the game...

Look, we all do it, except for maybe Melvyn.  Heck, I ever remember a conversation with Ralph a few years ago on the course in which he told me the distance he hits a couple of his hickory shafted clubs.  This is no put down on anybody.  I've certainly paced off my share of yardage over the years, or at least spotted a 150 and guessed from there...

But we all ought to know that when we rely on artificial aids to help us play the game, we're not really "playing the Game."  We're playing the Cliff's Notes version.

You just agreed with all of my previous posts.

[Craig Sweet]

This whole argument is silly....taken to the extreme perhaps we should graze sheep and forget the mowers...no "artificial aids"...etc.

Sean..

The game has ALWAYS been yardage dominated....whether Old Tom or Young Tom called it "yardage"..whether you call it yardage...."sizing up" (aka measuring) the proper yardage to hit a shot has ALWAYS been part of the game...

Where you are getting confused is assuming "measuring" means using an artificial device...we make measurement all day long (how far is a safe distance between me and the car in front).....

Ralph and Melvin can argue all they want that these guys 150 years ago did not consider distance and I will call BS....they can argue that Old Tom NEVER paced a single shot...and I will call BS...

Maybe one of our golf historians can shed some light, but I would think sometime around the 1930's people got tired of waiting for someone to pace off a shot, and the "yardage marker" was born in an effort to speed up the game..

[Craig Sweet]

Shivas....

"a truly great fisherman finds his own fish"

and a truly great golfer finds his own yardage?

Personally, I think still water (lake) fishing sucks...and I believe the Bass Tournament guys are banned from using fish finders..

Fly fishing, on the other hand is a different ball game and finding your own fish is 1/2 the game....maybe even 90% of the game.

[Melvyn Morrow]

Craig

As you seem to know so much about my family, I have always wondered what Old Tom had for breakfast when he last won The Open in 1867. And while you are at it can you confirm which side of the table Young Tom sat that morning. Just in case you need some help I give you a clue it was in Leith and the name of the place was…. No, as you seem to know everything else you can tell me.

Failure to divulge this full information will prove just who is producing all this BS.

I await your answer.

Melvyn

[Kyle Harris]

So has anyone considered any of the following:

How far did the modal gutta percha ball fly?
How good were the lies and how frequently did golfers encounter a lie that allowed for the maximum gutty distance to be achieved?
At what distance was it practical to aim for the flag?

[PCCraig]

Craig

As you seem to know so much about my family, I have always wondered what Old Tom had for breakfast when he last won The Open in 1867. And while you are at it can you confirm which side of the table Young Tom sat that morning. Just in case you need some help I give you a clue it was in Leith and the name of the place was…. No, as you seem to know everything else you can tell me.

Failure to divulge this full information will prove just who is producing all this BS.

I await your answer.

Melvyn

Insult deleted.

[Melvyn Morrow]

Kyle

Look at the early reports of the matches from the late 1850 onwards, which will give you a good break down. The tests between to rubber ball and gutty undertake on I believe three if not four occasions. Also it may be worth repeating Young Tom’s 1st hole at Prestwick in 1870 which was the longest hole in golf at that time, something like 560 yards (and tees area still marked at the club today) when he was down in 3. Gives you an idea of ball play in those days.

What appears important to us today may not even have been considered by those 50-75 years ago let alone 100-150 years. We must consider the world they lived in and what was important to them. If yardage as we use it was important then why is it not covered in reports from that era. What matter to them were the course and the hazards, yes they knew the length of each hole but there is no mention of markers. In fact if you read a recent post of mine you will have noticed that I mentioned Inch Markers, these are just simple boundary markers and that was all that appeared on courses in those days. Elie and TOC have them and are now within the course.

If yardage was as important to them as it is to many today, I believe it would have been passed on to me, but it was never mentioned, which IMHO proves to me it was not considered and certainly not in the way we do today.

Melvyn

[Kyle Harris]

Kyle

Look at the early reports of the matches from the late 1850 onwards, which will give you a good break down. The tests between to rubber ball and gutty undertake on I believe three if not four occasions. Also it may be worth repeating Young Tom’s 1st hole at Prestwick in 1870 which was the longest hole in golf at that time, something like 560 yards (and tees area still marked at the club today) when he was down in 3. Gives you an idea of ball play in those days.

What appears important to us today may not even have been considered by those 50-75 years ago let alone 100-150 years. We must consider the world they lived in and what was important to them. If yardage as we use it was important then why is it not covered in reports from that era. What matter to them were the course and the hazards, yes they knew the length of each hole but there is no mention of markers. In fact if you read a recent post of mine you will have noticed that I mentioned Inch Markers, these are just simple boundary markers and that was all that appeared on courses in those days. Elie and TOC have them and are now within the course.

If yardage was as important to them as it is to many today, I believe it would have been passed on to me, but it was never mentioned, which IMHO proves to me it was not considered and certainly not in the way we do today.

Melvyn

That is a rather light burden of proof, Melvyn - surely you can admit that.

That's why I asked for the modal figures. What yardages were most frequently achieved. One match is not going to provide near enough data - especially a match between the elites. This is like picking some PGA Tour event played this year in 100 years to determine the state of the game in 2009.

My point is, if it were practical and frequently possible for the players to reach the target at distances greater than those perceptible to the human eye, that information would have been readily available. However, the nature of the game at the time including conditioning, equipment and athleticism precluded achieving great distances.

When did putting become as we know it today?

[Charlie Goerges]

We have got some good material for future GCA spoofs on this thread. I'm looking forward to seeing a few in the coming days/weeks/months!

[Melvyn Morrow]

Kyle

The days of me passing on information on this site has come to an end, but I gave you some suggestions to search out and just mentioned the Prestwick 1st hole as a single example.

I thought I was helping, apparently not.

Melvyn

PS Pat - No insult from me - but why do you bother, trying to be the big man, its a discussion group for God's sake.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()