Tom
Melvyn,
Carts were not used in the past 6 centuries because they did not exist, not because of a moral objection by those playing.
Would you care to explain which technological advancement of the last 6 centuries you believe are acceptable and which are not?
First of all Golf is a game about walking and thinking. Technology is good if used to sustain or offer better reliability re the equipment, but it falls foul if it removes the human involvement in the game.
Example The 19th Century saw the game of golf maturing into a reliable game with the Gutty ball offering some 50-60 years of stability thus allowing clubs (equipment) to be consistent. By the 1890’s we had reliability at reasonable prices that allowed more than just the rich to play.
I am not against technology as long as it does not replace the human commitment or involvement in the game.
Carts and distance aids do just that they are outside aids.
To see a player fresh and not in any way fatigued because he rides does reflect upon his true performance, remembering that first and foremost golf is a walking and thinking game. Utilising any form of distance aids is again against the natural progression of the game over its 600 your years history. These are modern aids, actually no they are not aids in truth. I suppose we could call them crutches to support an uncommitted player who has not embraced the full quality of the walking thinking game of golf. The reason is down to the individual player, but for whatever reason they use them they are not involved in the walking thinking game that has evolved as Golf. A variation of the game, yes, no dispute, but it’s not golf.
In this country if you drive a car your licence defines if you are committed to driving an all sing and dancing manual gearbox car or an automatic box car. It affects your insurance cover too. However get caught driving a manual with an automatic licence and you will be up in front of the courts.
It’s a question of skill or defining if you have the skill to drive both or just an automatic box, being of course the easier of the two, being automatic, but no stigma associated with an auto licience.
So why not call cart ball, cart ball and walking thinking golf, golf as it has been for some 600 years and yes utilising the latest technology, manmade material to offer the game good reliability but not at the cost of advancing a players score, of helping him by being able to afford the latest equipment to achieve that better score.
All technology and modern materials are acceptable and we should embrace new technology, but not if they help lower a golfers score or allow his ball to travel further. Those achievements should come from the development of skill by the player
It’s all just a question of honesty and controlling technology for the good of the game and not just the unscrupulous players. Our Governing Bodies have never taken the time to study the consequences of their actions by allowing carts and technology to run nearly out of control.
The cost to golf for their inadequacies can be found with longer courses, destruction of some great Holes and Courses, the beginning of the demise of 36 Holes in a Day golf with a good lunch break. Also longer playing (slow play) times thanks to seeking carts, clubs on cart, cart tracks, Range finders, Markers, booklets or the worst of all the pacers of yardage. The fast natural instinctive game as you walk to your ball is becoming a thing of the past, minds cluttered by distance which in the final analyst our own brain/mind and eyes over rules when we take that final look prior to striking the ball – yes our brains overrule all outside aids and working on eyes/brain co-ordination and not what a book electronic gadget or even pacing might have produced.
Why can’t cart players and distance aid junkies just admit that’s theirs is a variation of the game and call it so – or is it all just down to plain vanity, do they feel that their variation is second best to golf but just do not want to admit it? Where is the crime in calling things exactly what they are instead of confusing everyone. Is there something wrong in being called a CartBall Golfer vs. A Golfer?
Hence I feel definition of the game is important
PS Tom, whatever your opinion thanks for asking a question associated with this topic, I hope I have answere your question