(more?) proof that distance-finders save time

[Rob Rigg]

I just received a Leupold GX-1 for product testing so I will post some thoughts about this in the next week or so.

I am really excited about having this technology on the range, where knowing your exact yardage is quite helpful. I play quickly and with only general yardage info so it may slow down my round if I was out there solo and using on every shot. However, I will not be walking all over the place looking for sprinkler markers and I am confident that I will have all the necessary info by the time I need to hit.

[Kalen Braley]

Tom,

I don't deny that there are golfers who either refuse or can't be bothered by looking at yardage markers...thats all fine and good.  I'm only saying they aren't getting around any quicker than they could by just using whats already available. But these companies don't want you or me to beleive that. They have most golfers convinced that its quicker to use their product over other methods like markers, etc, and thats the part I'm calling bullocks on.  Its no different than my wife taking the car down to the shop and them trying to wamboozle her that the car will run much better if she installs a 2nd transmission. 

Rangefinders as time savers is just a bucket of marketing Kool-Aid that most are now drinking and to the Manufactures delight, slowly but surely more and more golfers think they can't live without em.

[JohnV]

Kalen / Richard,  When you are 50 yards right of your fairway in another one and the course doesn't have little poles, but has sprinkler heads with yardages on them, don't you think a laser or sky caddie would be quicker than walking over to your fairway to find a yardage?

Maybe you aren't 50 yards off line, but I am at times.

The battery on my laser ran out two months ago and I haven't had time to replace it.  I can play either way, but after the last couple of months I do feel I play a little quicker with the laser than without.  Even when I just eyeball the distance as Melvyn would want us all to do, I'm still quicker and much more accurate with the laser.  Maybe if I spent a year or two just doing that I'd get more accurate, but I'm not sure it would be quicker.

In general, all this doesn't matter to me.  People should be allowed to play golf in any of the manners we've described.  Lasers / Sky Caddies / GPS in carts are useful to people.  Others don't like them.  Too bad, they are here and they ain't going away.  Get over it.  The important thing is stepping up and hitting the ball.  A lot more time is wasted in other areas than using a laser.

Having watched enough tournaments over the last 18 years that I've been a rules official, I will continue to believe that distance measuring devices do speed up play.  It is interesting to watch the different dynamics in a tournament where DMDs are allowed vs. those where they aren't.  If we allow them, the four players get to their drives and all pull out their laser / sky caddie and get their yardage.  Each player then hits in turn.  If we don't allow them, some of the players watch the first one get his distance and hit.  Then the next guy does his thing, then the next one etc.  It seems that they feel like they shouldn't be walking around while the other player is preparing / hitting so they don't get prepared as quickly.  Obviously not all players act this way, but enough do that it slows down play.

[Kalen Braley]

John,

I appreciate your last post, and I'm assuming most of those tournaments you've been to include accomplished players for the most part.  In this case, these guys could actually use and need those exact yardages, and this is a perfect scenario where I think they are great.

Its the other 99.9% of casual golf play that I'm not convinced of.  But I will very much agree with your statement that alot more time is wasted in other areas other than yardage calculation whether it be with gadgets or not.

[Joe Hancock]

"Oh goody! Another Illudium PU-36 Explosive Space Modulator! Isn't that lovely? Now we can blow up the Earth!"

 

[John Moore II]

John,

I appreciate your last post, and I'm assuming most of those tournaments you've been to include accomplished players for the most part.  In this case, these guys could actually use and need those exact yardages, and this is a perfect scenario where I think they are great.

Its the other 99.9% of casual golf play that I'm not convinced of.  But I will very much agree with your statement that alot more time is wasted in other areas other than yardage calculation whether it be with gadgets or not.

Problem is though too many people within this 99.9% think they need those exact yardages. I actually find I play better when I play loose and just eyeball distances than when I try to get exact distances. But how often do you see guys who can't break 100 if you give them 10 strokes walking off distances and plumbing putts and putting down a cheater line? It happens every day, even though those of us with common sense know that doing those things doesn't make a difference for those folks. If a SkyCaddy or Bushnell keeps some hump from walking off 70 distances a round from the fairway, the round will be played a good bit faster. People in America watch too much TV golf and listen to too many instructors who say you need some elaborate pre-shot routine. Thats why golf takes so long here and thats why DMD's can speed up play here.

[C. Squier]

I don't keep aggregate 18-hole score anymore, either.  I haven't for almost 10 years now.  

How do you measure yourself against other golfers?

Actually, this back and forth between Judge Smails and Ty Webb crystallizes everything that is wrong with the game (in the case of Smails) and right about the game (in Ty's case).

Smails takes it as a given that one must measure oneself against other golfers.  A given.  A presumption implicit in his view of the game.  

I vehemently disagree.  One does not need to measure oneself against other golfers.  If measurement is needed at all (and I am not sure it is), the simple answer is that one measures oneself against oneself.  How did you play today relative to your abilities?  Did you overcome the challenges presented by the golf course, or did they overcome you?  THAT is what matters.  

  

My post was completely tongue in cheek.  

But seriously, nobody can complain about rangefinders, lines on clubs/balls and then ask for handicap strokes on the first tee.  If a golfer is somehow cheating away a few strokes a round by using artificial devices, then how can we be OK with a 15 hdcp be the same as a 5 hdcp by the stroke of a pencil on a scorecard?  

[JohnV]

Ah pre-shot routine.  

Nobody has that down more than the junior girls I watch all the time.  3 practice swings, moon-walk back behind the ball to line it up, step back up.  Freeze over the ball for at least 10 seconds and then finally hit it.  

Fortunately the ones I see are pretty good so they hit it a fur peace and don't have to do it too often.

Then for a really good time, they play in a USGA qualifier where they can have a caddie for the firts time in their life and things really get slow.

One of our officials works a tournament for 7-10 year olds.  When they get behind, she tells them they are playing Sherrie Rules.  Only one practice swing per shot until they get caught back up.

[John Moore II]

Ah pre-shot routine.  

Nobody has that down more than the junior girls I watch all the time.  3 practice swings, moon-walk back behind the ball to line it up, step back up.  Freeze over the ball for at least 10 seconds and then finally hit it.  

Fortunately the ones I see are pretty good so they hit it a fur peace and don't have to do it too often.

Then for a really good time, they play in a USGA qualifier where they can have a caddie for the firts time in their life and things really get slow.

One of our officials works a tournament for 7-10 year olds.  When they get behind, she tells them they are playing Sherrie Rules.  Only one practice swing per shot until they get caught back up.

And so many instructors swear by these pre-shot routines. I teach people to have one, but its only about 5 seconds long. And practice swings, in my simple opinion, are a waste of time unless you are trying for a partial wedge shot or something. For a full swing, you don't need a practice swing, you all ready had 45 or so on the range and however many you've made on the course. Juniors are the worst because no one wants to really tell them to speed up. It took 7 hours to play an 18 hole Jr. event at one of my clubs, insanity.

[C. Squier]

I would do as I have done in the past ignore the markers or distance information. It will be easier for me as I just don’t use them.
Because I do not or have never used them, distance say 160 yards means nothing, I can’t equate it to a distance. What I do understand, well I hope so by now is what club to use subject to conditions and that I can achieve that distance by using that particular club.  Same with a putter, I was taught to square face the putter to the target.

So you're saying that in the thousands of holes you've played, you've NEVER in calm weather hit a ball next to a yardage marker?  Never been by the 150 pole, flush a full 7 iron and thought to yourself, "gee, I must hit a 7 iron 150 yards when I make a full swing".  I find it impossible to believe that you don't know down to +/- 5 yards how far you hit each and every club.  Note:  I'm not saying that you care how far, just that you DO know how far.  

It would be fantastic if ALL yardage guides were removed from a course.  I do believe we'd appreciate architecture more as well.  However, I'm not going to walk around pretending to ignore every sprinkler head, yardage pole and scorecard that exist on nearly every course in this country.  It's like erasing the New York Times crossword puzzle after someone just completed it and pretending that you did it yourself.  It has to be all or nothing.  If there's nothing, I would not use a yardage gun.  If there are yardage clues, my gun is faster.  

Kalen - Of course yardage guns are too exact for most golfers.  But do you expect them to be made to read out "about 150 yards" or "153"?  You could make a microwave that only warms up in 30 second increments and it would be just as useful as the ones that let you go second by second.  But that's just not going to happen.  People who are going to step off yardages will ALWAYS be sped up by using a gun.  Impossible not to.  Those who are happy by eyeing a 150 yard pole and guessing the rest probably won't be sped up.  But those are 2 different golfers.

[Tom Huckaby]

John,

I appreciate your last post, and I'm assuming most of those tournaments you've been to include accomplished players for the most part.  In this case, these guys could actually use and need those exact yardages, and this is a perfect scenario where I think they are great.

Its the other 99.9% of casual golf play that I'm not convinced of.  But I will very much agree with your statement that alot more time is wasted in other areas other than yardage calculation whether it be with gadgets or not.

Kalen:

Again seem to miss the point.  I never ever said any golfer goes faster using these devices then they COULD by using the methods you state (get distance as you walk or ride to shot and/or just estimate) - putting those words in my mouth is getting frustrating indeed.

  It's really very simple:  those who want exact yardage (and these are tournament players AND many many others - again these others don't need it - read clearly - they want it) go faster using GPS or laser devices.  They get their distance instantly rather than searching for it.  YES THEY COULD GO FASTER IF THEY DIDN'T SEARCH FOR EXACT DISTANCES, EITHER WAY.  But they cannot and will not do that.  So search for exact distances they will.  And they get such faster, instantly, using GPS or laser.

You seem to get the part that they can go faster.  The rest of your contentions baffle me.  

Because this is as far as I take it.  I am not saying the devices are good for the perfect form of the game, in fact in my perfect golf world there is no distance information at all used and thus these ought to be utterly cryit downe.  Or alternatively, in a slightly less perfect world, all golfers get their distance info in the more simple and casual way that you state.  Hell that's how I play.

All I am saying is that in today's rather screwed up US golf world, these do make the game go faster for quite a few golfers.  And thus I punt and say go ahead, use them.  I fully agree with you that most golfers don't need them.  I agree that they are marketed well.  But I'd say I am glad they are, because those who buy them tend to be slow to begin with (as they search out those exact distances they want) and these make them go faster.

Hopefully this try works.
 


 

[JohnV]

Ah pre-shot routine.  

Nobody has that down more than the junior girls I watch all the time.  3 practice swings, moon-walk back behind the ball to line it up, step back up.  Freeze over the ball for at least 10 seconds and then finally hit it.  

Fortunately the ones I see are pretty good so they hit it a fur peace and don't have to do it too often.

Then for a really good time, they play in a USGA qualifier where they can have a caddie for the firts time in their life and things really get slow.

One of our officials works a tournament for 7-10 year olds.  When they get behind, she tells them they are playing Sherrie Rules.  Only one practice swing per shot until they get caught back up.

And so many instructors swear by these pre-shot routines. I teach people to have one, but its only about 5 seconds long. And practice swings, in my simple opinion, are a waste of time unless you are trying for a partial wedge shot or something. For a full swing, you don't need a practice swing, you all ready had 45 or so on the range and however many you've made on the course. Juniors are the worst because no one wants to really tell them to speed up. It took 7 hours to play an 18 hole Jr. event at one of my clubs, insanity.

Hand out 17 penalty strokes in one day like I did about 2 months ago and the pace of play will increase dramatically among the juniors.

[John Moore II]

Ah pre-shot routine.  

Nobody has that down more than the junior girls I watch all the time.  3 practice swings, moon-walk back behind the ball to line it up, step back up.  Freeze over the ball for at least 10 seconds and then finally hit it.  

Fortunately the ones I see are pretty good so they hit it a fur peace and don't have to do it too often.

Then for a really good time, they play in a USGA qualifier where they can have a caddie for the firts time in their life and things really get slow.

One of our officials works a tournament for 7-10 year olds.  When they get behind, she tells them they are playing Sherrie Rules.  Only one practice swing per shot until they get caught back up.

And so many instructors swear by these pre-shot routines. I teach people to have one, but its only about 5 seconds long. And practice swings, in my simple opinion, are a waste of time unless you are trying for a partial wedge shot or something. For a full swing, you don't need a practice swing, you all ready had 45 or so on the range and however many you've made on the course. Juniors are the worst because no one wants to really tell them to speed up. It took 7 hours to play an 18 hole Jr. event at one of my clubs, insanity.

Hand out 17 penalty strokes in one day like I did about 2 months ago and the pace of play will increase dramatically among the juniors.

Well, it was a shotgun event as well with at least 2 groups on every hole, 3 on some. But I would hand out penalty strokes in a second if need-be. Only problem is, this was a privately run junior tour event, and I think they are running somewhat for-profit. That mostly eliminates many penalties.

[Wade Whitehead]

Last week, I played in a regional qualifier for the US Public Links.  My starting time was 8:46 a.m.  The starter, after welcoming us and reviewing the rules sheet, said "We intend to cut the field and start round two at 12:30."  There were two more groups after us, which meant an expected pace of play of 3 hours and 30 minutes or less.

55 minutes later, my threesome was waiting on the third tee.  We watched as a player on the maybe-reachable par five paced from the 200 yard disc to his ball, which was probably 265 yards from the green.  An hour after we hit our first shots, we began play on the third hole.

Both in this competitive environment and more casual amateur play, I cannot conceive that distance devices would not absolutely speed up play.

WW

PS Round two did not begin on time.

[JohnV]

Well, it was a shotgun event as well with at least 2 groups on every hole, 3 on some. But I would hand out penalty strokes in a second if need-be. Only problem is, this was a privately run junior tour event, and I think they are running somewhat for-profit. That mostly eliminates many penalties.

The biggest problem with almost any golf tournament or day on the course.  Too many players and not enough intestinal fortitude among the organizers.  Not much can be done about those.

[JohnV]

Last week, I played in a regional qualifier for the US Public Links.  My starting time was 8:46 a.m.  The starter, after welcoming us and reviewing the rules sheet, said "We intend to cut the field and start round two at 12:30."  There were two more groups after us, which meant an expected pace of play of 3 hours and 30 minutes or less.

55 minutes later, my threesome was waiting on the third tee.  We watched as a player on the maybe-reachable par five paced from the 200 yard disc to his ball, which was probably 265 yards from the green.  An hour after we hit our first shots, we began play on the third hole.

Both in this competitive environment and more casual amateur play, I cannot conceive that distance devices would not absolutely speed up play.

WW

PS Round two did not begin on time.

Did they actually wait for the entire field to finish before making the cut?  At most USGA qualifiers that use a cut, they do it as the players finish and just cut the high scores.  For example at the US Junior at Stanford on Monday, if you shot 77 or higher you went home.   The others got repaired as they finished and sent back out after a quick lunch.  1/2 the field made the cut.

[Kalen Braley]

Last week, I played in a regional qualifier for the US Public Links.  My starting time was 8:46 a.m.  The starter, after welcoming us and reviewing the rules sheet, said "We intend to cut the field and start round two at 12:30."  There were two more groups after us, which meant an expected pace of play of 3 hours and 30 minutes or less.

55 minutes later, my threesome was waiting on the third tee.  We watched as a player on the maybe-reachable par five paced from the 200 yard disc to his ball, which was probably 265 yards from the green.  An hour after we hit our first shots, we began play on the third hole.

Both in this competitive environment and more casual amateur play, I cannot conceive that distance devices would not absolutely speed up play.

WW

PS Round two did not begin on time.

And I'm sure it was that one player who caused the entire field to come to a grinding halt...   

[John Moore II]

Last week, I played in a regional qualifier for the US Public Links.  My starting time was 8:46 a.m.  The starter, after welcoming us and reviewing the rules sheet, said "We intend to cut the field and start round two at 12:30."  There were two more groups after us, which meant an expected pace of play of 3 hours and 30 minutes or less.

55 minutes later, my threesome was waiting on the third tee.  We watched as a player on the maybe-reachable par five paced from the 200 yard disc to his ball, which was probably 265 yards from the green.  An hour after we hit our first shots, we began play on the third hole.

Both in this competitive environment and more casual amateur play, I cannot conceive that distance devices would not absolutely speed up play.

WW

PS Round two did not begin on time.

And I'm sure it was that one player who caused the entire field to come to a grinding halt...   

Well, if the organizers expected everyone to be finished by 1215, with groups teeing off up to 9am, then they just don't understand how golf works. I never have pre-booked a replay round at a club for less than 5 hours after the first teetime and in a tournament where you have to play 36, I really don't think I would book the second round start less than 5 1/2 hours after the start of the first group. I am trying to work through my mind though how a 36 hole qualifier would work with more than 70 or so players anyway.

[Melvyn Morrow]

Clint

Yardage is not part of my long game, it’s never has been. I was not brought up with this craven for distance information so why would I care or notice a marker. That distance in yards means zero to me. What I see is what I play. The only time I can remember talking about distance is on the Green when saying you are x feet from the hole.

It would seem you have been indoctrinated with distance and its part of your game. Yet looking at the records, your way is new, it’s the latest way to play (mainly I presume because many feel it gives them an edge) and thus because of your indoctrination you feel that everyone must play it your way. I find that so hard to understand when history does not support yardage, no record of distance in the format you use it today. Perhaps I am one of the few still wanting to play unaided by outside information, but the game of golf has been played without distance aids centuries longer that with the darn things. 

Let’s be honest if it proved that they actually cost you a stroke or two per round they would be dropped like hot coals and few players would use them. It’s an aid an outside aid and golfers just do not need them IMHO. They should never have been allowed but that just shows the quality of the guys who control the game – basically IMO they do not care about Golf, its money that is their primary interest.

Why is it so difficult for you to understand that others don’t need it to play golf?

If I use one I would feel that I was cheating myself, so feel unhappy with the idea, because I play for my fun. For me the cheat myself just makes no sense. So I still don’t use them, well the last time I played, in fact I have never used them.

Melvyn

[C. Squier]

Clint

Yardage is not part of my long game, it’s never has been. I was not brought up with this craven for distance information so why would I care or notice a marker. That distance in yards means zero to me. What I see is what I play. The only time I can remember talking about distance is on the Green when saying you are x feet from the hole.

It would seem you have been indoctrinated with distance and its part of your game. Yet looking at the records, your way is new, it’s the latest way to play (mainly I presume because many feel it gives them an edge) and thus because of your indoctrination you feel that everyone must play it your way. I find that so hard to understand when history does not support yardage, no record of distance in the format you use it today. Perhaps I am one of the few still wanting to play unaided by outside information, but the game of golf has been played without distance aids centuries longer that with the darn things. 

Let’s be honest if it proved that they actually cost you a stroke or two per round they would be dropped like hot coals and few players would use them. It’s an aid an outside aid and golfers just do not need them IMHO. They should never have been allowed but that just shows the quality of the guys who control the game – basically IMO they do not care about Golf, its money that is their primary interest.

Why is it so difficult for you to understand that others don’t need it to play golf?

If I use one I would feel that I was cheating myself, so feel unhappy with the idea, because I play for my fun. For me the cheat myself just makes no sense. So I still don’t use them, well the last time I played, in fact I have never used them.

Melvyn

Melvyn, I admire your stance.  But your reading comprehension absolutely stinks. 

So you're saying that in the thousands of holes you've played, you've NEVER in calm weather hit a ball next to a yardage marker?  Never been by the 150 pole, flush a full 7 iron and thought to yourself, "gee, I must hit a 7 iron 150 yards when I make a full swing".  I find it impossible to believe that you don't know down to +/- 5 yards how far you hit each and every club.  Note:  I'm not saying that you care how far, just that you DO know how far. 


If you actually take the time to read what I said, you'd realize that I never said you relied on ANY yardage.  But simply once in your life you've hit a full shot in calm conditions next to a yardage marker.  Unless you walk with a blindfold in, it would be impossible to not notice yardage markers on a course.  EVEN THOUGH YOU NEVER WANT OR NEED TO USE THE INFORMATION.....it is impossible not to make a connection with a yardage when the information is EVERYWHERE.

Claiming that you've NEVER made this connection is like saying a student could take a test ethically and the teacher had the answers posted all over the classroom chalkboards. 

[JohnV]

It’s an aid an outside aid and golfers just do not need them IMHO. They should never have been allowed but that just shows the quality of the guys who control the game – basically IMO they do not care about Golf, its money that is their primary interest.

You are right they aren't needed, but they are wanted by many.  Not everyone is as serious about their own game as you to be able to do what you do.

I don't think it is money, but reality that caused them to be allowed.  Since the USGA makes no money from the sale of range finders I find it hard to see how you can say it is about money.

Range Finders were here and were being used.   The USGA resisted for a few years, but eventually the pressure from the golfing public got to be too great.  Some of this is their fault due to the handicap system here where they want every round posted.  Ban Range Finders and you make every round played with one a round that can't be posted (they snuck around that one for a while).  That didn't follow the desired model.  Don't beat me up for the USGA's take on handicapping.  I'm not a big fan of it, but I'm also a realist.  I know people here want handicaps even if they don't want to play in a monthly medal or whatever.

Since clubs and tournaments were allowing them regardless of the USGA's stance on them, it makes sense to write a rule that allows for limits to their usage.  At least they required opt-in rather than opt-out.

Clint, Melvyn needs to play with Ron Read of the USGA.  He requires anyone who looks at a yardage marker to add $1 to the pot.  He can't reach most par 4s in regulation so he doesn't need much yardage help - Driver, 3-wood, chip over and over.

[Harvey Dickens]

Couple of points... I had never considered the fact that distance tools take away from the visual effect that a designer had in mind. It does not completely negate the effect because it is still in the back of your mind "that does not look like 175 yards". But I can see where that is a negative.

Put me down on the side of greatly speeds up play for anyone interested in yardage. The Gps even more than range finders. The group I play with on a regular basis carry two and it speeds one of the guys up by 10 minutes a round. It is probably more valuable to the less skilled golfer as he is often in places where yardage is not easily attainable.

If your interested in yardage, going to have the course marked by other means....you might as well use a distance tool.

[JWinick]

The game of golf is hard enough.   In order to help the player, yardage markers, caddies, and range finders are all ways to help the player know their distance from the hole.    A range finder is just the most efficient measure invented to know thy distance.   

If you're a serious player playing a serious match, distance is relevant!   Guys like Melvyn don't play the game of golf for competitive purposes.   I enjoy the competition.  So, sue me.   Since I care about my results, I am going to use every legal means to know my distance.

[Sean_A]

Couple of points... I had never considered the fact that distance tools take away from the visual effect that a designer had in mind. It does not completely negate the effect because it is still in the back of your mind "that does not look like 175 yards". But I can see where that is a negative.

Put me down on the side of greatly speeds up play for anyone interested in yardage. The Gps even more than range finders. The group I play with on a regular basis carry two and it speeds one of the guys up by 10 minutes a round. It is probably more valuable to the less skilled golfer as he is often in places where yardage is not easily attainable.

If your interested in yardage, going to have the course marked by other means....you might as well use a distance tool.

Harvey

The problem is two-fold.  First, as you mention, deception can largely be weeded out.  Second, guys can get a distance range between points which makes choosing a club easier both off the tee and for approaching.  Sure, you could likely get this info with a book previously if you were in the fairway, but most people don't use books when they play - probably because its a hassle and slows the game way down.  So yes, I can buy that in this context, guns are quicker than books.  However, for folks to tell me that they play with golfers who walk off yardages in regular play, my reply is why do you play with them?  They wouldn't last long in my circles as people would just begin to hit out of turn and tell the idiots to hurry up for good measure.  Its ok to be competitive, but there are limits.  if guys are willing to go to these lengths to beat mates and club members, then we have a much more serious problem on our hands then how to make the game quicker.

Ciao

[Melvyn Morrow]

Clint

I did answer your question, but let me repeat myself. Distance in knowing the yardage has no part of my game. So landing on, near any marker, is more or less meaningless to me. It may not be for you because you have been indoctrinated with the idea of knowing or needing to know yardage, so it will register with, it just does not with me because I do not need to know yardage.

John

I am referring to money being more important to the R&A than protecting the quality and integrity of the Game of Golf. I was not inferring that they get a kick back from electronic aid sales.

I have always played for pleasure, I have never tried to be a Pro, I play golf for the fun and enjoyment of the great outdoors, the love of links golf, plus the benefit of  the exercise and one of the best ways to beat stress.

I care about my game and how I conduct myself. There is nothing wrong in trying to get the best out of yourself, but then I draw the line when it comes to use outside aids. Clearly, some golfers seem unable to calculate distance correctly so need help from some outside source i.e. markers, etc. I feel it is wrong and should not be allowed, I don’t want it in my game because for me I would be conning myself, cheating myself and not actually relying on my own ability to play the game, no matter if my score remains the same or improves. I do not think that distance markers should be allowed but modern golfing attitudes seem to dictate their use. Comments like “Since I care about my results, I am going to use every legal means to know my distance” disappoint me because it clearly shows how indoctrinated many of the modern golfer are by wanting to know the yardage at all times.

I have watched and play with some of these yardage seekers. The outcome nearly every time is that the round was not enjoyable. There seems to be this inability by some to just play the game. The constant interruptions by some could be described by an innocent observer that these individuals were seeking the very secrets of eternal life. My problem is that the game over here is becoming overwhelmed with this need for yardage, yet golfers really do not require let alone need it. I would go one-step further and say the modern mindset of the yardage-seeking golfer may be less attuned to the architecture of the course than he/she actually realises.

My problem is that they are legal, they make the golfer more reliant on an outside aid diminishing his/her own natural ability. For me that alone is reason enough to have them all removed from our courses. I fully understand that the majority disagree, but what really worries me is that all seem to feel it helps.

Each golfer must decide for themselves. However, human nature will always look for the easy or let’s call it a helpful solution but is that really the right way forward for our game of golf? Regrettable not for this guy.

Melvyn