Was Old Tom the Standard Bearer for Range-Finders?

[PCCraig]

What's forgotten is that the vast majority of players in the US are not on the golf course for the same reason as someone who disdains the use of all the modern devices like:
range finders -X
yardage markers -X
ProV1s -X
spiked shoes -X
tees
bags
motor carts -x
pull carts -X
steel shafts -X
graphite shafts -X
rubber grips -X
cavity back investment cast irons -X
titanium drivers/fwy woods -X
sand wedges -X
chest length putters -X
belly putters -X
sunglasses
gore-tex rain gear
gloves -X
 
X= Big Aid! 

I got tired of typing.

If you use any 'aid' on the above menu you cannot lay claim to being a purist, you are a cafeteria golfer and lose any moral high ground in this argument, but I'm sure that won't stop anyone from rationalizing it in any way that floats their boat.   

I agree Jim.

I was under the impression that unless you use a shepherd's crook and literal rocks you are not playing "pure" golf.   

[Tom Huckaby]

To Jim Kennedy:

I too think you are missing the point here, or at the very least getting too caught up in the details.

The main point is this:  I do quite sincerely believe the game would be more fun if selection of club became a skill earned through experience rather than given to one on a platter.  HOW WE GET TO THAT POINT does remain very problematic.  The suggestion of changing the rules just seems to me to be the most practical way at this point in time.

Just note re the rules changes:

a) no notes or yardage guides are allowed on the course during a stipulated round; so it doesn't matter if you created it yourself or purchased something... either way you'd have to rely on memory.

b) caddies also cannot give yardage info - they can suggest clubs, but not give numbers.  That's solved under a change in the advice rule.

I do think that IF these rules changes were adopted, it would "work."  On those with a mind to cheat would certainly do so - as happens today under current rules.  But the vast majority of golfers would go kicking and screaming - or willingly - back to the future.

So to Sean, yes I am advocating the banning of distance information; in the sense that courses will no longer be marked, caddies cannot give distance info as advice, and of course electronic aids may not be used.  Do all this and it achieves the end you advocate - that is, "knowledge of yardage (distance, type of shot whatever) be gained through experience rather than gifted as some sort of divine right."  So perhaps we are saying the same thing.  In the end, if golfers want to choose to continue to relate club selection to specific distances, that of course will remain their right.  They're just going to have to EARN that distance information (either through experience, memorization or something) rather than have that given to them.

Other golfers will learn to eyeball a shot and relate it to a CLUB to be used....

I think it would be great fun, and yes, a superior way to play the game for one and all.

It also certainly does NOT mean one has to go back to hitting rocks with shepherd crooks.  To me B&I innovation is completely separate from this.

Now once again, do I believe this has a snowball's chance in hell of really happening?  Of course not.  And that's where I differ from Melvyn.

I have to believe Ralph Livingston sees the reality as well (though I hope he chimes in).  The Society of Hickory Golfers likely can and does eschew distance information in their events (they sure have the right attitudes to do so)... but as cool as they (we) are, they (we) are a tiny subset of the world's golfers.

TH

[Brent Hutto]

Tom,

In all seriousness, why don't you just find somebody who wants to play that game and go out and play it? Pick a course that isn't overly marked up with distances, ignore whatever is there and have a guessing game along with your golf. If it's such a great game I'm surprise you haven't found a way to play it.

What bugs me isn't your preferring that game (or more precisely Sean preferring it since I doubt you ever play a round without distance information on the vast majority of your shots). What bugs me is your wanting to by hook, crook or Rule force the 99% of the golfers in the world who are comfortable with knowing how far it is to the hole to dumb their game down to your preferred level. It's akin to a person who hates garlic wanting a health code enforced which bans garlic from everyone's food. That's just nuts.

[Tim Bert]

Tom -

I understand the points made by many on both sides here.  I'm not a range finder guy.  I don't feel the need to know the EXACT yardage of each shot, but it is helpful to know +/- 15 yards.  

If we went through with your proposal, can you honestly state you would never step off the distance of a shot (after you hit it and were walking to the green) on a course you played regularly to make a mental note for yourself the next time?  I wouldnt' be able to resist.

I love the idea of no yardages on a one-time play course.  I'd love to join you for a game some time on a mutually never played course and have at it touchy-feely style... the Sheep Ranch was a blast!  BUT at a course I'm playing on a daily basis, I'm going to figure out what club I hit from what spots over time any way.  That pleasure may only last a few months or a year anyway.  

I think the proponents of no yardage are over-stating the case of the skill factor just a bit.  If you play a course regularly unless you have no memory, you will have a sense for what to hit and I don't see how that is superior to having the distance.

[Tom Huckaby]

Tom,

In all seriousness, why don't you just find somebody who wants to play that game and go out and play it? Pick a course that isn't overly marked up with distances, ignore whatever is there and have a guessing game along with your golf. If it's such a great game I'm surprise you haven't found a way to play it.

What bugs me isn't your preferring that game (or more precisely Sean preferring it since I doubt you ever play a round without distance information on the vast majority of your shots). What bugs me is your wanting to by hook, crook or Rule force the 99% of the golfers in the world who are comfortable with knowing how far it is to the hole to dumb their game down to your preferred level. It's akin to a person who hates garlic wanting a health code enforced which bans garlic from everyone's food. That's just nuts.

Brent:

Well you have a point there.  I certainly am advocating forcing a way I think would be fun on the rest of the world's golfers.  I absolutely believe that many would take it exactly as you are.  That's the main reason why I don't think this has any chance of really happening.

SO... you may have noticed I don't get much into any huge policy reasons behind this.  Is this the way the game is meant to be played or was originally played?  Hell if I know.  I THINK so, but I sure can't prove it.  To me, it seems like a better way to play, as it restores some more judgment to the game.. so much of which has eroded over the years.  But I surely don't expect all to agree with this.

BTW, you might have noticed I posted yesterday that hell no, I don't play this way now.  Oh I have tried it a couple times - it takes a course that isn't marked for it to be feasible, and on those few (Ballyneal comes to mind) it was pretty darn fun.  But heck even there I only lasted a few holes, and was begging for use of my friend's Bushnell pretty quickly, as there was a match to be won!

But the main point is this:  it's not so simple to say just go out and play this way - come on Brent, do you really believe it's possible to ignore all the distance markings on a typical course?  I sure don't see that.... and again, given the purpose of most of my golf is to post a score, win a match, do something competitively, it's just not feasible to play this way now, ceding advantage to the competition.  Nor do I want to as it would be just such a pain in the ass given the proliferation of distance info.

But change the rules such that everyone has to play this way, markings are removed... man I'd love that.  I do think it would be a better way to play this game.

But reasonable minds will of course differ.

TH

[Niall C]

Tom

I have only dipped in and out of this post so comments below may already have been aired by someone else but I wonder if the modern prevelance of given yardages is a product of the extra length we are now hitting the ball.

Trying to eyeball the distance of say 130 yards, whether you are measuring it in yards, metres or the appropriate club to play is fairly straightforward but when the distance is say 200 yards, the player may not be able to make any kind of reasonable estimate so anything he hits will just be a hit and hope. I can't think that is a practical way of doing things, nor all that satisfying.


 

[Paul Stephenson]

If instituted as a rule it would certainly bring about a "home field advantage" to top amatuer and professional competition.

Would the probability of the US Am winner being a local guy increase?  Would tour rookies fair nearly as well as they do now?  My guess is yes to the first question and no to the second.

For some reason a local guy winning the Am appeals to me while lessening the impact of the rookies/youth on tour does not.

I'll just be a good Canadian and continue sitting on the fence.

[Tom Huckaby]

Tom -

I understand the points made by many on both sides here.  I'm not a range finder guy.  I don't feel the need to know the EXACT yardage of each shot, but it is helpful to know +/- 15 yards.  

If we went through with your proposal, can you honestly state you would never step off the distance of a shot (after you hit it and were walking to the green) on a course you played regularly to make a mental note for yourself the next time?  I wouldnt' be able to resist.

I love the idea of no yardages on a one-time play course.  I'd love to join you for a game some time on a mutually never played course and have at it touchy-feely style... the Sheep Ranch was a blast!  BUT at a course I'm playing on a daily basis, I'm going to figure out what club I hit from what spots over time any way.  That pleasure may only last a few months or a year anyway.  

I think the proponents of no yardage are over-stating the case of the skill factor just a bit.  If you play a course regularly unless you have no memory, you will have a sense for what to hit and I don't see how that is superior to having the distance.

Tim - you too miss the point.

Under my suggestion you can step off distances as much as you want!  You're just going to have to base it on MEMORY or EXPERIENCE... the key is that the course is unmarked and distance info is not given.  But if you remember based on notes or experience or whatever that some bush is 150, hell yes step off the distance to it!  There would be no prohibition on this whatsoever.  If that's how you want to play, go for it. Of course we'd add to the slow play rule or something some way to get people NOT to step off distances all the way to the hole... but sure, some would do that too in the short term.  The hope is in the long term they'd see what idiots they look like doing so.


In any case, the main point remains that all of this becomes a skill rather than having it given.  Sure on one's home course you'd come to know all the distances, or clubs to be hit under normal conditions from certain points.  But I think that' GREAT!  Experience / knowledge is rewarded....

And that's the point.  As Sean says, "knowledge of yardage (distance, type of shot whatever) be gained through experience rather than gifted as some sort of divine right."

I just think that would be a better way to play.  And it only works if distance markings are removed and these rules changes are made.

TH

[Tom Huckaby]

Tom

I have only dipped in and out of this post so comments below may already have been aired by someone else but I wonder if the modern prevelance of given yardages is a product of the extra length we are now hitting the ball.

Trying to eyeball the distance of say 130 yards, whether you are measuring it in yards, metres or the appropriate club to play is fairly straightforward but when the distance is say 200 yards, the player may not be able to make any kind of reasonable estimate so anything he hits will just be a hit and hope. I can't think that is a practical way of doing things, nor all that satisfying.


 

Niall - no one is saying this would be EASY.  Oh I agree it would be very difficult, with the difficulty increasing the longer the distance is.  And it is a great point that very long distances require different clubs for many people NOW, whereas at some point in time anything over 210 (or whatever) would have just been 3wood for one and all....

But think of it this way too... as this became so hard... wouldn't strategic play increase?  Wouldn't those who COULD estimate distance better and dare I say THINK THROUGH THE SHOT better come to have an advantage?

Man I think that would be great... I'd sure love to even the scales a bit against those for whom a 250 yard shot is now a "stock 4iron"....

TH

[Kalen Braley]

Tom, et al.

You may or may not recall this course i reviewed last fall..  http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,36430.0.html.  They took this distancec thing a step further by having bogus yardage markers all over the course.    (mostly just on the tees).  As the course has 3 par 3's and several other short par 4s these bad yardages can really wreak havoc on ones game...especially where missing a green usually means death in an unplayable lie/OB.

On a side note, after recently discussing Painswick and Lincoln Park and thier corresponding quirkiness, i think this would be right up there too.  This course has turned into a semi-annual must play for me as its so damn unorthodox....even though i've given up the delusion of ever holding a GCA event there as much as I'm convinced it would be a hit! 

[Tom Huckaby]

Tom, et al.

You may or may not recall this course i reviewed last fall..  http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,36430.0.html.  They took this distancec thing a step further by having bogus yardage markers all over the course.    (mostly just on the tees).  As the course has 3 par 3's and several other short par 4s these bad yardages can really wreak havoc on ones game...especially where missing a green usually means death in an unplayable lie/OB.

On a side note, after recently discussing Painswick and Lincoln Park and thier corresponding quirkiness, i think this would be right up there too.  This course has turned into a semi-annual must play for me as its so damn unorthodox....even though i've given up the delusion of ever holding a GCA event there as much as I'm convinced it would be a hit! 

WHOA!  OK, that's taking this to a level I can't see as fun... you may recall my rants on THE RANCH... they too have bogus yardage markings on many holes.  The point is not to deceive, the point is to make distance information earned.

But that is thinking outside the box, that's for sure!

TH

[Tim Bert]

Tom - I don't miss the point; I just don't agree with the entire point.  

I completely embrace your idea for the getaway weekend, the golf trip, the one time visit to a course I've never played.

I just don't see that I've accomplished anything special by "figuring out" the yardages at a home course where I'm going to play weekly.  I don't think the yardages are a divine right, and I'd be happy to play without being given them, but I'm going to figure them out at a regularly played course and it isn't because I have (roughly speaking) amazing ability to retain information.  It's because if I'm standing next to some fairway bunker and I hit a 9-iron to the green and I've played the course weekly for a year, I'm going to remember that.  I dispute that I've shown adittional skill at that point.

As for walking off the distance, I don't think you could create a pace of play rule that would prevent someone from pacing off a rough yardage from the bush next to the fairway (unless you are going to require this game to be played from carts and thereby eliminate any of the purity.)  I could get a +/- 15 yard estimate if I wanted by walking briskly, by jogging, or doing anything else to keep up.  I take quick, long strides in the course of walking whether or not I'm stepping off distance, so I think I could do it without looking like a crazed maniac in the middle of this exercise of purity.  

Remember - I'm not the purist Melvyn nor am I the "I need pinpoint yardage to a green despite the fact that I'm an 18 handicapper and only his my precise yardage once every 20 times I strike the ball anyway" guy.  I'm just in the middle - looking to have a good time.  

What fun would it be if some of us didn't take a different stance?  It's never going to happen anyway, so if we are all going to agree there's no reason for this thread to make it up there with the "Arts & Crafts" in the top 10.

Looking forward to playing a round with you later this summer if it works out - ancient-style or modern-style.

[Tom Huckaby]

Tim:

OK, my bad.  Let's rephrase it to say I think you too are getting a little too caught up in the details.

If people want to pace off yardages to any point, let them do it.  The hope remains that over time one and all will come to see the stupidity/futility of doing so... or at the very least get branded as such slow-pokes that they quit doing it all that much simply out of shame.  In any case, the fact this might happen to me doesn't diminish any part of the benefit of removing dstance information.

As for this:
just don't see that I've accomplished anything special by "figuring out" the yardages at a home course where I'm going to play weekly.  I don't think the yardages are a divine right, and I'd be happy to play without being given them, but I'm going to figure them out at a regularly played course and it isn't because I have (roughly speaking) amazing ability to retain information.  It's because if I'm standing next to some fairway bunker and I hit a 9-iron to the green and I've played the course weekly for a year, I'm going to remember that.  I dispute that I've shown adittional skill at that point.

The point to me remains that one way or the other, judgement is required, rather than everything being given on a silver platter as it is now.  Is this that big of a deal at a course one plays all the time?  Nope.  It surely would increase one's home course advantage over a visitory though... which to me is a good thing.  But again one way or the other, to me the fact this doesn't work out as all that big of a deal at home courses does also not diminish the benefits of doing this.

But outside of that, heck yeah I fully expect MANY, IF NOT MOST, to completely disagree with this, as Brent has... again, that's the largest reason why it would never happen.  I just want to make sure we're really talking about the same things before we agree to disagree.

As for you and I playing, it's gonna have to be out here as travel is not in the cards for me, sadly.  But let me know if you do get back out here!  And if we play, unless it's at a course that is wholly unmarked, then you know how we will play the game.... under the rules in place today.   

TH

[Niall C]

Niall - no one is saying this would be EASY.  Oh I agree it would be very difficult, with the difficulty increasing the longer the distance is.  And it is a great point that very long distances require different clubs for many people NOW, whereas at some point in time anything over 210 (or whatever) would have just been 3wood for one and all....

But think of it this way too... as this became so hard... wouldn't strategic play increase?  Wouldn't those who COULD estimate distance better and dare I say THINK THROUGH THE SHOT better come to have an advantage?

Man I think that would be great... I'd sure love to even the scales a bit against those for whom a 250 yard shot is now a "stock 4iron"....

TH
[/quote]

Tom,

To an extent I take your point about the increase in strategic play.

To me its like the difference when I play snooker or pool. If I'm trying to pot a ball on a full size snooker table and its at the other end of the table then frankly its a hit and hope as to whether I even hit the ball. Basically its beyond my level of competency whereas on a smaller pool table I'm not only looking to pot the ball but I am going to try and play for position for the next ball. I might not manage it but at least have engaged the brain and tried to play a shot a certain way to produce a desired result.

To adapt the above to the golf course, the 200 yard plus shot would mean playing away from the hazard to take the safe line just because I couldn't probably gauge what the challenge is. I'm thinking here of more modern courses which have more by way of hazards to be crossed.

Don't get me wrong, I'm with you that the game should be more than being given a yardage and simply (I wish !) hitting that yardage. To get the brain engaged I think you would need more than removing yardage informnation from a course, I think you would need to throw in other factors such as wind, undulating hard and fast ground.

There's a thought, anyone ever thought about building a course by the seaside ?

Niall

ps. I wish I could hit my driver 250 yards let alone a 4 iron   

[Tom Huckaby]

Niall:

Great stuff - well said, all of it.  And you and me both brother, re the "need" for seaside courses to best exploit this, and the wishful thinking about 250 yard shots!

 

[Anthony Gray]

  I DO NOT USE RANGE FINDERS!! I DO NOT BELIEVE IN ARTIFICAL HELP!


   Tthis is why I refuse SPELL CHECK. Spell Check is unnatural, artifical, and just plain cheating. Spell it as it lies (sounds) boys.

  Anthony

[TEPaul]

"Spell it as it lies (sounds) boys."

Anthony:

Have you ever seen a word after it really got laid improperly?

[Sean_A]

To Jim Kennedy:

I too think you are missing the point here, or at the very least getting too caught up in the details.

The main point is this:  I do quite sincerely believe the game would be more fun if selection of club became a skill earned through experience rather than given to one on a platter.  HOW WE GET TO THAT POINT does remain very problematic.  The suggestion of changing the rules just seems to me to be the most practical way at this point in time.

Just note re the rules changes:

a) no notes or yardage guides are allowed on the course during a stipulated round; so it doesn't matter if you created it yourself or purchased something... either way you'd have to rely on memory.

b) caddies also cannot give yardage info - they can suggest clubs, but not give numbers.  That's solved under a change in the advice rule.

I do think that IF these rules changes were adopted, it would "work."  On those with a mind to cheat would certainly do so - as happens today under current rules.  But the vast majority of golfers would go kicking and screaming - or willingly - back to the future.

So to Sean, yes I am advocating the banning of distance information; in the sense that courses will no longer be marked, caddies cannot give distance info as advice, and of course electronic aids may not be used.  Do all this and it achieves the end you advocate - that is, "knowledge of yardage (distance, type of shot whatever) be gained through experience rather than gifted as some sort of divine right."  So perhaps we are saying the same thing.  In the end, if golfers want to choose to continue to relate club selection to specific distances, that of course will remain their right.  They're just going to have to EARN that distance information (either through experience, memorization or something) rather than have that given to them.

Other golfers will learn to eyeball a shot and relate it to a CLUB to be used....

I think it would be great fun, and yes, a superior way to play the game for one and all.

It also certainly does NOT mean one has to go back to hitting rocks with shepherd crooks.  To me B&I innovation is completely separate from this.

Now once again, do I believe this has a snowball's chance in hell of really happening?  Of course not.  And that's where I differ from Melvyn.

I have to believe Ralph Livingston sees the reality as well (though I hope he chimes in).  The Society of Hickory Golfers likely can and does eschew distance information in their events (they sure have the right attitudes to do so)... but as cool as they (we) are, they (we) are a tiny subset of the world's golfers.

TH

AwsHuckabilly

That about sums it up for me. 

I would like to point out to Brent that if I see yardage markers I can't possibly ignore them.  Its just that I don't actively seek them out.  I spose part of the reasoning for not seeking them out is because I am not good enough to play by yardage.  If I was, I would be a comfortable scratch player.  It is very rarely that I am duped by a misjudgement of distance and when I am I generally think the archie has been a crafty devil.  Nearly all of my errors have nothing to do with distance judgement.  I have seen you and many others play and my conclusion is the same for you and whoever.  I think people use yardage as a crutch, sort of like training wheels for a bike.  They are simply afraid to let go.  When I think about it, for the vast majority of players, the best play is to ignore yardage and go for the most achievable shot available - especially in recovery situations.  Like much of the time on this site, we (the big ME included) try to place ourselves in the position of the great player and play like he does, or think about the strategy of a hole like he does.  Far more often than not, this is a big mistake which usually leads to higher scores.

Ciao

[Tom Huckaby]

Those are great points by me Sean - well said.

I also think that once the crutch is removed, we'll all learn to walk just fine... so to speak... that is, over time, the reliance on specific distances would become looked at as some weird way they used to play... as people see their scores actually drop as they make proper/mindful plays, as you describe....

Or at least that's one possible outcome.   

[Anthony Gray]

"Spell it as it lies (sounds) boys."

Anthony:

Have you ever seen a word after it really got laid improperly?

  All the time....My wife suggested I name my daughter Hannah because of my dyslexia.

  Anthony

[TEPaul]

"My wife suggested I name my daughter Hannah because of my dyslexia."

Aha, Anotonio, the old whatchamacallit! Pal...ah, palindrome! Good idea.

As I age gracefully I'm getting a bit aixelsyd myself. I might think about changing my name from Tom to Mom for convenience sake.

[Anthony Gray]

"My wife suggested I name my daughter Hannah because of my dyslexia."

Aha, Anotonio, the old whatchamacallit! Pal...ah, palindrome! Good idea.

As I age gracefully I'm getting a bit aixelsyd myself. I might think about changing my name from Tom to Mom for convenience sake.

  Tom,

   Have you seen the photo of Mom?

Anthony

[Jim_Kennedy]

You're missing the point.....knowledge of yardage.... (should) be gained through experience rather than gifted as some sort of divine right.
- Sean Arble

I'm not missing the point at all Sean, and I'm a guy who rarely, if ever, uses a range finder (and I always use the blank sections of my golf ball when putting  ). All the years of experience that give you a 'home course advantage', at least in respect to yardage, is as equally wiped out whether or not I spend time pacing off distances or use a rangefinder to acquire the knowledge. All the years of experience that give you a REAL 'home course advantage', like what tactical choices to make, the intricacies of the putting surfaces, your local windage, etc., still remain, even if I'm playing against you and whip out my rangefinder (shades of Cleavon Little   ).    
 

...a) no notes or yardage guides are allowed on the course during a stipulated round; so it doesn't matter if you created it yourself or purchased something... either way you'd have to rely on memory.
b) caddies also cannot give yardage info - they can suggest clubs, but not give numbers.  That's solved under a change in the advice rule.
 - Tom Huckaby

Tom,
Is your 'solution' to trash several hundred years of rules history in a (misguided) attempt to limit the information available to a player? Your 'rules' just elevate 'memory' to a never before seen status in those rules. 
  
Ralph 'said' (he can correct me if I am wrong) that before we had 'modern' clubs (iron sets w/progressive lofts) knowing yardages was way down on the scale of importance when measured against knowing how to gauge what needed to be done by using 'feel'. He also said players traveled less and played fewer courses, which also elevated the importance of 'local  knowledge' over knowing 'yardages' in that era.  If they eschew yardage  information it's because that's how the game was played in the era they are recreating for their events.

So really, if you play with 'modern' clubs there is no way you can replicate the experience you say you are after. Even if the rules said that you couldn't use any books, markers, caddies, or rangfinders to obtain yardage, you'd still be playing with equipment that is designed to hit the ball in specific increments of yards, every time, with a standard swing. It's the equipment itself that has caused player's to search out yardages.

I think there are only three approaches....
-You play mainly with the equipment from the era that Ralph knows so well; try to never look at yardage markers, and use feel and depth perception( hopefully you have both your eyes) to make your way around the course.   
-You take a 'modern' approach, realizing that the genesis for the modern equipment in your possession began ca.100 years ago and its evolution and your knowledge of yardages hasn't changed the skill and judgement needed to be successful.
 -You 'mix' the eras to suit your own personal agenda. There is nothing in the rules saying you must use every available modern advantage. You could throw away 2/3 of your irons, take your SW out of the bag, add a couple of hickory 'play' clubs,, etc., etc, whatever floated your boat.

...adjust to your liking, then pick one.
   

[Tom Huckaby]

Jim:

You are a tough nut to crack.  I mean that as a compliment.

 

But methinks you miss one very key element of this:

I have no great desire to play my own way.  I want the STANDARD way to be the way I advocate.  Heartless, selfish?  Guilty, guilty.  But the point is I look to a golf world sans distance markings and see a good thing.  If you do not, that's fine, we can quit quibbling over how to get there.  But if you do... well....

None of your three choices work for me.  It's just not practical - or dare I say possible - to ignore distance information the way courses are so clearly marked these days.  As for equipment, the day all my opponents use such is the day I do also (outside of a few funsy rounds, which were the purpose of me purchasing hickory clubs - thanks to Ralph's advice).

You do make valid points.  Equipment today does make this problematic.  Just note too - memory would be valuable - and yes elevated - in only ONE way to go about playing the game in my approach.  That is, those that remain slaves to the need for a distance would have to develop good memories.  But others may just learn to eyeball better, play shots based on feel... the hope being that the latter becomes more prevalent over time.

But also answer this:  are you HAPPY with the status of equipment today?

And if not, can't you see another benefit of my idea?

As the benefits of dialed-in distance decrease, might not equipment go at least a little back to the future also?

It's food for thought anyway.

[Sean_A]

You're missing the point.....knowledge of yardage.... (should) be gained through experience rather than gifted as some sort of divine right.
- Sean Arble

I'm not missing the point at all Sean, and I'm a guy who rarely, if ever, uses a range finder (and I always use the blank sections of my golf ball when putting  ). All the years of experience that give you a 'home course advantage', at least in respect to yardage, is as equally wiped out whether or not I spend time pacing off distances or use a rangefinder to acquire the knowledge. All the years of experience that give you a REAL 'home course advantage', like what tactical choices to make, the intricacies of the putting surfaces, your local windage, etc., still remain, even if I'm playing against you and whip out my rangefinder (shades of Cleavon Little   ).    
 

...a) no notes or yardage guides are allowed on the course during a stipulated round; so it doesn't matter if you created it yourself or purchased something... either way you'd have to rely on memory.
b) caddies also cannot give yardage info - they can suggest clubs, but not give numbers.  That's solved under a change in the advice rule.
 - Tom Huckaby

Tom,
Is your 'solution' to trash several hundred years of rules history in a (misguided) attempt to limit the information available to a player? Your 'rules' just elevate 'memory' to a never before seen status in those rules. 
  
Ralph 'said' (he can correct me if I am wrong) that before we had 'modern' clubs (iron sets w/progressive lofts) knowing yardages was way down on the scale of importance when measured against knowing how to gauge what needed to be done by using 'feel'. He also said players traveled less and played fewer courses, which also elevated the importance of 'local  knowledge' over knowing 'yardages' in that era.  If they eschew yardage  information it's because that's how the game was played in the era they are recreating for their events.

So really, if you play with 'modern' clubs there is no way you can replicate the experience you say you are after. Even if the rules said that you couldn't use any books, markers, caddies, or rangfinders to obtain yardage, you'd still be playing with equipment that is designed to hit the ball in specific increments of yards, every time, with a standard swing. It's the equipment itself that has caused player's to search out yardages.

I think there are only three approaches....
-You play mainly with the equipment from the era that Ralph knows so well; try to never look at yardage markers, and use feel and depth perception( hopefully you have both your eyes) to make your way around the course.   
-You take a 'modern' approach, realizing that the genesis for the modern equipment in your possession began ca.100 years ago and its evolution and your knowledge of yardages hasn't changed the skill and judgement needed to be successful.
 -You 'mix' the eras to suit your own personal agenda. There is nothing in the rules saying you must use every available modern advantage. You could throw away 2/3 of your irons, take your SW out of the bag, add a couple of hickory 'play' clubs,, etc., etc, whatever floated your boat.

...adjust to your liking, then pick one.
   

Jim

If you think you can pace off 150 yard shots then get back to hit your ball in the time allotted, more power to you.  This still is not nearly the same thing as whipping out a gun for the distance - this is the point you are not giving merit.  However, you do skip by my biggest concern and that is hamstringing the creativity of archies.  There is no point to creating dead space or whatever deception if a guy can just shoot a yardage as if he were a surveyor.  Its fair enough if you don't believe gauging distance should be a skill that is learned and valuable, but I do and I think its a pity the USGA and R&A see it your way.  That doesn't mean I will tisk tisk those that want to use yardage devices, I just call em' girlie boys - tee hee.

As for "breaking" the tradition of rules, man, they are broken all the time.  Rules change, including the allowing guns to aid with distance determination.  Sometimes change is for the better, and sometimes its not.  We fall on different sides of the coin, its not the end of the world.  I am usually on the different side of the coin to most on this site.

Ciao