[Patrick_Mucci]

I can cite to no studies or empirical scientific data, but I've been playing in Chicago District better ball events for about 14 years now. In the beginning rangefinders and distance aids were verboten, and 6 hour rounds were the expected norm. Several years in they started allowing the range finders, and the pace of play, while not spectacular, is at least usually around an acceptable just over four hours.

Are you sure that range finders are the reason for reduced time ?

At six hour rounds are you saying that the Chicago District took no steps to produce shorter rounds ?

[Sean_A]

I bought one last year about the same time I took 2hrs worth of lessons (first lessons I ever had) and improved from a 7-8hcp to a 4-5 fairly rapidly.

It's likely that was more to do with the lessons than the laser, but it has definitely proved helpful and helped me to feel more confident about a shot as I stand over the ball. Especially on 40-90m shots.

Clint

This is exactly what I speak of.  Players gaining confidence with lasers - more than with yardage markers.  I don't believe for one second this isn't the case for all laser users.  I don't like it and it surprises that anyone close to a purist would like it...and I wouldn't label myself as a purist. But  the world is a big place. 

Ciao

[Scott Warren]

Sean,

I feel the same way when I play somewhere with a caddie and he tells me the exact distance to the hole, which as I understand it has been going on longer than lader and GPS devices have been popular. They just make it easier and faster to get accurate info.

And the above being so, I still find "dead grouond" adds a feeling of discomfort even when I know it's X metres. When my brain and my eye disagree, it's hard to be absolutely comfortable.

[Ally Mcintosh]

Where I come from, we used to just call this “home-course advantage”. It was experience of how best to play a particular shot. I don’t see how it relates to distance markers.

It has everything to do with distance markers.  I know my 8 iron goes 155 yards, you know it goes the distance between the half dead pine tree to the center of the green.  Some use numbers, others use landmarks.  It's still a measurement in distance, just different units.  The only time its different is when playing a brand new course.  It's a skill to eyeball something accurately when you've never played the hole.  It's not a skill to simply remember what club you hit yesterday on the same hole.  

I figured this might be the response given back.

I don’t agree though – I see one as learned experience. The other is information fed to you and has little to do with skill or judgement.

But really that is not the point. Generally, I think most people would be surprised how quickly they adjust to reading the feel of the shot by just eyeballing it on the walk to the ball and upon arrival.

But I will reiterate – I do tend to seek out distances at target golf, soft and watery courses. That is a different game to on the links or the heath…. And I would be happy for there to be 150 yard markers as long as they are vertical so they just warrant a glance as you are walking to your approach shot… My main objection to distance aids is information overload. I have the same backward approach to society and culture in general though… 

[Tony_Muldoon]

I bought one last year about the same time I took 2hrs worth of lessons (first lessons I ever had) and improved from a 7-8hcp to a 4-5 fairly rapidly.

It's likely that was more to do with the lessons than the laser, but it has definitely proved helpful and helped me to feel more confident about a shot as I stand over the ball. Especially on 40-90m shots.

Clint

This is exactly what I speak of.  Players gaining confidence with lasers - more than with yardage markers.  I don't believe for one second this isn't the case for all laser users.  I don't like it and it surprises that anyone close to a purist would like it...and I wouldn't label myself as a purist. But  the world is a big place. 

Ciao

When they came out it was the “certainty” that swung it for me, they were clearly the Devils tools and had nothing to do with the game I liked to paly.   However after watching  them in action I realise it’s just a source of information, like sprinkler heads or caddies. Except it’s faster. Much faster. You look and the info is there.  As with any source of info it’s what you do with it next.

Slow players have their routine where they check the paces from a distance marker and then look at the scoresaver once, twice, three times.  In Rough Meditations, Brad Klein recounts watching a tour player going through his routine even when it involved taking ONE pace from the Course marking to the tee of the day  to confirm the distance to the centre of the green.

I can’t speak for Lasers, as I’ve not used one.  However from observation they do take longer and are not so useful when you are facing blind or off line shots but they may be better for the Category one golfer.   I’m happy to know where the middle of the green is.  In fact my Garmin GPS is in fact not as accurate as tee markers and most 150 yard stakes.  Surprisingly often it is 5 yards out. So Certainty isn’t guaranteed either. But it is fast.

Also I’ve tried the eyeballing thing and I’ve concluded that maybe because I came to the game to late, or that my failing eyesight is to blame, but I doesn’t work for me.  Particularly on Links courses, where I play approx..2/3rds of my games  I can misread by 2 clubs easily. Also I really seem to have difficulty calling the shot at 70 or 90 yards.  I do believe this depth perception is an ability stronger in some humans than others, and I’m weak at it.  Despite practice it hasn’t improved.  How some people think it’s OK for me to listen to a caddie’s advice but not look for some other distance help,  is a mystery to me.

To respond to Dan King.  I will be careful to inform my partners on the first tee that I have one and I’m happy to give them a reading if they care to ask and then I’ll keep quiet about it.  (I’d like to think that’s what I’ve been doing but I’ll be careful to check.)

Looking forward to my game in two weeks with two of the naysayers here!  I’ll bring the watch and my usual rotten game.

[Sean_A]

Spangles

You know me.  If you don't want to play for money I don't care if you kick the ball to the hole.  Its your time and money.  While I may give laser using girlie boys grief, I don't really care much.  I am not good enough to care much.  All that said, I disapprove of the trend in making golf more gadgety and less about the simple concept of finding the ball and hitting it.  I realize I look at the game differently from most in that golf is only a game for me and I tend to have little patience for amateurs who take it more seriously than that.  But I wouldn't ever say I won't play with laser wielding, cart driving, mega driver swinging nancy boys.  So long as I can smoke a cigar all is well. 

Ciao

[David Davis]

Pat,

A 3 hour twosome doesn't exist at my club unless you are jogging (or playing the ladies tees)

Is that because of the culture of your club ?

What is/are the impediment/s that cause/s slow play to be prevalent at your club ?

so I'd love to invite you over to prove that one.
I'll buy the drinks. No carts aloud.


I'm available

Pat, while I'm not the fastest player, I walk fast and love to play what in my mind is quick, ready golf. I don't enjoy to wait on shots anymore than the next guy but I'm patient enough in tournaments that I try not to let it bother me.

Sometimes I go through periods where I feel awkward or uncomfortable standing above the ball and have the feeling even through I use my preshot routine that I don't know how to start the swing. Hard to explain. In any case, I'm not a slow player and our club culture is one of rather fast play not unlike Scotland and Ireland. The challenge is that our course is long for a links course at 7000 yds and if you play the back tees you have to walk back and up hills a fair bit which creates a situation where it simply takes longer. I would say if you played in a two ball in 3:15 hours you would be just flying, the pace that would allow you to play 2:30 hours at many courses.

On top of that my course is what I'd call very difficult, you have to really think about a lot of shots and also if you can play 18 holes without having to search for balls on several holes then you are also playing some pretty great golf. Hit all the fairways and greens and yes of course you will play much faster, but I've maybe once had the experience where I played with a really good player and we managed to hit most the fairways and greens. There is almost always some searching going on, especially when the wind is up.

I honestly, don't think if you played our course in 3:15-3:30 you would have the feeling you played slow. More likely the feeling that you were exhausted from the walk.

[Lou_Duran]

I realize I look at the game differently from most in that golf is only a game for me and I tend to have little patience for amateurs who take it more seriously than that.  But I wouldn't ever say I won't play with laser wielding, cart driving, mega driver swinging nancy boys.  So long as I can smoke a cigar all is well. 

Such lovely sentiments from a real man's man.  And what kind of cigar would that be?

BTW, unlike McDs which has never failed me, I bought a Garmin watch just like my host's at Deal following the Buda 2011, but within three months of use, the fully charged battery wouldn't make it through a full round.  For Christmas this year, my family got me an Expresso WR62 which works wonderfully for three rounds on a full battery but now refuses to recharge.  I am now thinking about a range finder, but I've seen them run out of battery during a round as well.  With poor eyesight, what am I to do?  Rely on course signage or take my time trying to figure out the intricate yardage books?  Or better yet, I can go anti-King and be appreciative of my playing partners' generous assistance.

BTW2, I've heard it is within the rules for an opponent to give you a yardage but not the club.  Does anyone know if this is true?

[Mark Pearce]

Lou,

That's correct.  It's OK to ask for and be given information (the distance to the flag is 137 yards) but not advice (What club should I hit?).

[SL_Solow]

Lou;  Range finder batteries are easy to switch out.  Some folks keep an extra in their bag.

[Brent Hutto]

My Bushnell's batteries last so long, my spare 9V is past its sell-by date when I finally get around to using it. When I first got mine back around 2004-ish it came with a 9V battery installed. So I picked up a spare 9V from the battery drawer at home and stuck it in the carrying case. About three years later the original one went dead and I put the spare in, halfway through a round. Within a few months the new one was dead.

My point being, they last many hundreds of "shots" and unless you use the rangefinder way more than I do per round it will be a long time before you have to replace it. In which case it is literally a 30-second operation if you have close at hand.

[C. Squier]

I bought one last year about the same time I took 2hrs worth of lessons (first lessons I ever had) and improved from a 7-8hcp to a 4-5 fairly rapidly.

It's likely that was more to do with the lessons than the laser, but it has definitely proved helpful and helped me to feel more confident about a shot as I stand over the ball. Especially on 40-90m shots.

Clint

This is exactly what I speak of.  Players gaining confidence with lasers - more than with yardage markers.  I don't believe for one second this isn't the case for all laser users.  I don't like it and it surprises that anyone close to a purist would like it...and I wouldn't label myself as a purist. But  the world is a big place. 

Ciao

The game is hard enough, is a little extra confidence really that bad of a thing?

[Lou_Duran]

Thanks Mark, SL, and Brent.

A guy I play golf with has had his battery go out on his device, twice I think in the past year.  Like with my experience with watches, it was probably an anomaly and he was unprepared.

Two or three years back, I did a product testing and review of a Bushnell with slope range finder and it took me awhile to learn how to hold it steady enough for a good reading.  That is the main reason why I went with the GPS watch.  And maybe why I can't putt worth a lick.  If I only had a drinking problem for an excuse!

[Mark Smolens]

I can cite to no studies or empirical scientific data, but I've been playing in Chicago District better ball events for about 14 years now. In the beginning rangefinders and distance aids were verboten, and 6 hour rounds were the expected norm. Several years in they started allowing the range finders, and the pace of play, while not spectacular, is at least usually around an acceptable just over four hours.

Are you sure that range finders are the reason for reduced time ?

At six hour rounds are you saying that the Chicago District took no steps to produce shorter rounds ?

Am I "sure" that the range finders are the reason? Other than the fact that nothing changed in the CDGA's practices relative to these better ball events, no. That's why I indicated the absence of any science behind the assertion.

And I don't consider an old guy in a blue coat in a bucket hat on the first tee telling us to keep pace with the group in front of us constituted taking steps to produce shorter rounds. For the first few years of the events, they just didn't seem to care about pace of play. And watching a group of guys playing an unfamiliar course (most of these events are conducted at private clubs, affording trunk slammers such as myself a chance to play a round of country club golf at an affordable price) wandering around looking for sprinkler heads like it was a Chinese fire drill was enough to drive a man to drink -- which the CDGA will not permit us to do during their events!

[Patrick_Mucci]

I can cite to no studies or empirical scientific data, but I've been playing in Chicago District better ball events for about 14 years now. In the beginning rangefinders and distance aids were verboten, and 6 hour rounds were the expected norm. Several years in they started allowing the range finders, and the pace of play, while not spectacular, is at least usually around an acceptable just over four hours.

Are you sure that range finders are the reason for reduced time ?

At six hour rounds are you saying that the Chicago District took no steps to produce shorter rounds ?

Am I "sure" that the range finders are the reason?
Other than the fact that nothing changed in the CDGA's practices relative to these better ball events, no.
That's why I indicated the absence of any science behind the assertion.

Mark,

I'm not familiar with Chicago golf and golf tournaments, but I find it hard to believe that the "Association" responsible for conducting them, wasn't concerned about six (6) hour rounds

And I don't consider an old guy in a blue coat in a bucket hat on the first tee telling us to keep pace with the group in front of us constituted taking steps to produce shorter rounds. For the first few years of the events, they just didn't seem to care about pace of play.

What about your fellow competitors ?
Surely they must have objected to six (6) hour rounds

And watching a group of guys playing an unfamiliar course (most of these events are conducted at private clubs, affording trunk slammers such as myself a chance to play a round of country club golf at an affordable price) wandering around looking for sprinkler heads like it was a Chinese fire drill was enough to drive a man to drink -- which the CDGA will not permit us to do during their events!

In the NY Met area, clubs usually host practice rounds, which allow the competitors to familiarize themselves with the hosting course.

Doesn't the CDGA try to secure venues that allow practice rounds ?

[Joe Bentham]

Range finders have slowed the game down significantly in the last 4 years.

[Mark Smolens]

I can cite to no studies or empirical scientific data, but I've been playing in Chicago District better ball events for about 14 years now. In the beginning rangefinders and distance aids were verboten, and 6 hour rounds were the expected norm. Several years in they started allowing the range finders, and the pace of play, while not spectacular, is at least usually around an acceptable just over four hours.

Are you sure that range finders are the reason for reduced time ?

At six hour rounds are you saying that the Chicago District took no steps to produce shorter rounds ?

For the bigger CDGA events (the CDGA Am or the State Am), the private host courses generally permit practice rounds, but the Better Ball one day, events they do not. It's nice enough for these courses to permit 88 non-members access to their courses on a Monday, but to permit those players additional access seems to be above and beyond, and I have no problem with that.

Lots of guys complained about the pace of play. Those were the same guys who were marking the 6" putts rather than reaching across and tapping them in 

Am I "sure" that the range finders are the reason?
Other than the fact that nothing changed in the CDGA's practices relative to these better ball events, no.
That's why I indicated the absence of any science behind the assertion.

Mark,

I'm not familiar with Chicago golf and golf tournaments, but I find it hard to believe that the "Association" responsible for conducting them, wasn't concerned about six (6) hour rounds

And I don't consider an old guy in a blue coat in a bucket hat on the first tee telling us to keep pace with the group in front of us constituted taking steps to produce shorter rounds. For the first few years of the events, they just didn't seem to care about pace of play.

What about your fellow competitors ?
Surely they must have objected to six (6) hour rounds

And watching a group of guys playing an unfamiliar course (most of these events are conducted at private clubs, affording trunk slammers such as myself a chance to play a round of country club golf at an affordable price) wandering around looking for sprinkler heads like it was a Chinese fire drill was enough to drive a man to drink -- which the CDGA will not permit us to do during their events!

In the NY Met area, clubs usually host practice rounds, which allow the competitors to familiarize themselves with the hosting course.

Doesn't the CDGA try to secure venues that allow practice rounds ?

[Paul OConnor]

Those CDGA Better Ball events are notoriously slow, I played in one last year, 5 1/2 hours at Floosmoor.  So the contention that the laser has picked up pace is not true for the one event in which I played.  That was probably my last of those Better Ball deals though.  WAY WAY WAY too slow.  

CDGA gets paid, the host club gets paid, the general public gets access to decent clubs for $150/round, everyone is happy, as long as you got all day.  It's usually the same guys registered for those BB events anyway, same guys event after event, year after year.  Apparently they don't mind.  I can't take it anymore.  

[Lloyd_Cole]

I'm with Tony 110% because I have actually owned a laser thingy. I never intended to use it in a match, but I did want to map out the course and get my yardages right. I couldn't use it, my hands were not still enough, my eyesight is quite poor, still, it's strange - they are fine for my day job... I cannot eyeball the yardage anymore. I could when I was 15. Today I cannot. I have resisted buying a device because most of them do slow down the round. Just getting the thing out and putting it away again... But I have been known to find my ball and then not know where the nearest sprinkler head was, find it it and then pace out my yardage... not too speedy either. My regular partner Brian just bought a Garmin watch - it gives front, centre and back yardages. No need to press a button or get it out of your bag. That seems like progress for me. I think I want one. 9 out of 10 of my playing partners still don't understand that a downhill shot into the wind can often mandate adding more club than than an uphill shot into the same wind.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Lloyd,

I see more and more golfers wearing the distance watches, which seem to reduce the time it takes to determine yardages.

But, I doubt they'll reduce the general pace of play.

One can only hope

[Lou_Duran]

Lloyd,

I see more and more golfers wearing the distance watches, which seem to reduce the time it takes to determine yardages.

But, I doubt they'll reduce the general pace of play.

One can only hope

If one looks for yardages on irrigation heads or uses a scope, he will save time with a GPS watch.  However, this alone will not make much of an impact.  A player who has to look at the target, shoot a distance, visualize the shot, and rehearse the swing several times will always play slower than the guy who looks, pulls the club, and hits the shot in rapid succession.  For the latter, the watch can help.

Lloyd-

I am a fan of the GPS watch used in conjunction with a pin sheet, though I have not found one I am happy with.  I bought an Expresso WR62 to replace the original version of the Garmin Approach.  Garmin claimed 8 hours of battery life, but within the first three months of use, it was mostly depleted within four hours (it died after three on my last round before I sent it back).

The Expresso provides 12 hours of use on a full battery as advertised.  Unfortunately, the recharge leads are exposed to the skin and clog up routinely.  The fix is relatively simple, warm water and soap applied with a tooth brush, but I don't like the idea of putting water and electronics close together.  I've had issues with holes not advancing automatically, a common problem supposedly solved by the company with a software change.  Unfortunately, though I have a good computer with current software, the update sent via the internet doesn't work and they want me to send the watch in at my own cost.  CAN NOT RECOMMEND EXPRESSO.

I am left to reconsider a range finder, shaky hands and all.  The friend I referred to earlier that had a battery go out twice on his emailed me that it had only happened once (he hadn't gotten around to replacing it for awhile).  It appears that changing the battery is very easy.  On the GPS watches, at least the Expresso, once the battery dies and can't be recharged, you chuck the watch and get a new one.  On the plus side, this should take a few years of moderate use.     

[Lloyd_Cole]

I am a fan of the GPS watch used in conjunction with a pin sheet, though I have not found one I am happy with.  I bought an Expresso WR62 to replace the original version of the Garmin Approach.  Garmin claimed 8 hours of battery life, but within the first three months of use, it was mostly depleted within four hours (it died after three on my last round before I sent it back).  

Damn!
I will borrow my friend's one after he's had it a few months I guess.
One point I should make is that with more than a 9 iron in my hand I should really be aiming for the middle of the green on almost every shot. I'm not good enough to be trying for more than that. I am often stupid enough to forget this. Which is just as well - no pin sheets at our course 

[Brent Hutto]

At the risk of droning on about one niche option...

The best of all worlds is a course with the prisms installed atop each flag stick and one of the zero-magnification, prism-only "Quick Shot(tm)" type rangefinders. I am very much a pull the club and hit it person (to a fault, on occasion but I'm working on it). No practice swings, almost never any indecisive club-changing, no throwing grass into the breeze. So as I've mentioned before I will have the rangefinder in hand and be shooting the flagstick (basically waving the rangefinder in the general vicinity of the correct direction for a couple seconds) as I'm taking my last five or six steps to the ball. When it vibrates and the number comes up on the display I am usually just stopping to shed my bag.

And just when I thought maybe it was me, I joined up with a couple guys in a cart yesterday on the back nine. They had the same Quick Shot device that I use. I noticed they did the same thing, as they were pulling up to their first ball the guy in the passenger seat was already pointing at the flag and calling out the number.

The problem of course is that only half the courses I encounter have the prisms installed. So at unfamiliar courses I take the laser instead, or just leave off altogether and count on sprinkler heads.

[Lou_Duran]

The middle of the green is always good, Lloyd.  I am a card and pencil type who sometimes suffers from delusions of grandeur.  Though I hit fewer than a third of the greens and many of my misses are short, I am always leery of back pin positions.  Typically, it the pin is in the front or the back, I will go with the lesser club a bit harder.  Red, white, and blue flags in lieu of a pin sheet are fine.

[Thomas Dai]

"The middle of the green is always good" - nice line.

Anyone every played a full 18-hole course but with no flagsticks/pins present, just the cups? Pretty soon your whole course management approach changes.

All the best

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()