why golf sucks

[WLVRYN]

Ben Crane is the posterboy for slow play, which a rangefinder wont help much, but he did have several discussions with his caddie on yardages that day that he wouldnt have had if he had the exact distance. That alone would have cut a couple of minutes off an excruciatingly long round (almost 6 hours, coupled with the fact that he called in rules officials twice for drops).

It takes about 5 seconds to shoot the yardage with the rangefinder, so that adds what, a minute or two to the round assuming the pros go through all the other routines that they do before they play. I realize that they will still consult their yardage books and pin sheets (as they should). This isnt a lot of additional time, and if it reduces anyone's preshot time, then it will be a benefit to the tour.

What the USGA did wasnt to help speed up a PGA tour round (they left that decision up to the tours to decide whether to allow them in tourneys or not). They attempted to improve the pace of play for the average players who dont have yardage books, pin sheets and caddies. They did this because average players have developed bad habits from watching the pros pace off to the exact yard. It was killing the recreational game by lengthening rounds to 5-6 hours and pushing people away from the game or keeping them from joining up because of the time commitment. Are you telling me that if your cart had a GPS system on it, it would be faster to go walk off the yardage yourself than to look at the screen? IMHO, anything that shortens a round is good thing. If the PGA tour doesnt like it, then they dont have to adopt it.

[HDPM]

"Are you telling me that if your cart had a GPS system on it, it would be faster to go walk off the yardage yourself than to look at the screen?"


I don't think using a cart is golf either. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]


I agree the USGA has done more to ruin golf, make it expensive, and make it take a long time with the failure to catch the optimized equipmnet until it was too late. The rangefinder is not the main culprit I suppose. However, the rangefinder is something I don't think belongs on a golf course. I am getting crusty in my old age. I no longer carry 14 clubs a lot of the time. I am debating whether to ban myself from getting yardages at all. I may simply look at the overall yardage of the hole and go by eyeballing it from there. I have not been playing much tho. Maybe the next round I play I will try to do it with 8 clubs and trying to avoid all yardage markers. Problem is you can see them on my course, so you get a ballpark yardage.

My dream pro silly season event is a no caddy, no yardage book, no pin sheet, no sprinkler head 7 club max tournament on a classic course. Carry your sticks and use your eyes and feel. Tiger would win. Ben Crane not allowed. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[WLVRYN]

[ QUOTE ]
"Are you telling me that if your cart had a GPS system on it, it would be faster to go walk off the yardage yourself than to look at the screen?"


I don't think using a cart is golf either. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]


I agree the USGA has done more to ruin golf, make it expensive, and make it take a long time with the failure to catch the optimized equipmnet until it was too late. The rangefinder is not the main culprit I suppose. However, the rangefinder is something I don't think belongs on a golf course. I am getting crusty in my old age. I no longer carry 14 clubs a lot of the time. I am debating whether to ban myself from getting yardages at all. I may simply look at the overall yardage of the hole and go by eyeballing it from there. I have not been playing much tho. Maybe the next round I play I will try to do it with 8 clubs and trying to avoid all yardage markers. Problem is you can see them on my course, so you get a ballpark yardage.

My dream pro silly season event is a no caddy, no yardage book, no pin sheet, no sprinkler head 7 club max tournament on a classic course. Carry your sticks and use your eyes and feel. Tiger would win. Ben Crane not allowed. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I figured you were a crusty old school guy. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

The USGA is in the uneviable position of having to regulate a game against the wishes of equipment companies that have far greater resources than the USGA could ever hope to have, and against players that want to score better than they are now. I would imagine you are in a huge minority of people that wouldnt want to use available technology to improve their scores. I remember reading something when the whole COR issue came up that said that the average handicap/score of non-pro players hasnt changed much in the past 20 years, which tells me people are better off spending money on lessons and practicing than the new $500 driver.

And while I would prefer to walk when I play, the game would be unplayable for the average golfer without carts and the standard round would definitely be in excess of 5-6 hours. It would also eliminate a large portion of the golfing population from even playing at all, which is not what the USGA is interested in.

Leave it up the to PGA tour to make their own rules for the best players, but the USGA has to regulate the everyman and do what's best to get/keep people interested in golf.

[HDPM]

Yeah, the technology isn't going to help the scores of the average player all that much. Also, a huge problem that only some people are talking about is the expense of golf caused by the equipment. Forget the 500 driver and the 300 rangefinder, think about the problems caused by the golf ball going 7 miles for people with high swing speeds. Mediocre designer du jour now builds a mediocre 7600 yard course. That takes more land. So it costs more. And all the landing areas have to be bigger, so it takes much more land, so it costs more. And now there is a lot of room between the holes and from the tips the course is long, so people don't like walking it. So they take carts, and that drives up the cost. And people have been taught golf courses are very lush with greens that stimp pretty fast, and that costs more. And to challenge the 23 year old with 117 MPH swing speed, the course is tricked up and phony from the mediocre designer. So the average player doesn't get the huge jumps in distance from the optimization, because a lot of those only happen at high swing speeds. And he plays from a set of tees he shouldn't of course because that is what guys do. So his score may actually go up because of all the wonderful technology. It will cost more, so he will play less. It will take longer, so he will play less. And some numbers are showing fewer people are playing or at least that there is no growth in players. Golf is becoming more expensive and actually less fun with the technology. I posted a while ago about how the abominable cart started the decline a long time ago, by allowing long unwalkable courses.

Maybe I will pull up my old post, but until then I will add an anecdote. My parents have a house at an old peoples' place in the palm springs area. Golf courses designed by a mediocre designer. They cost a lot to play and are kept in very good shape. There were forced carries. unbelievable at an old peoples community. Mandatory carts of course. So you have people die sooner because they don't walk. They lose strength and compress their spines riding around. And then there are forced carries once in a while. So they pay for the privilege of frustrating golf and being hurt physically. I compared it to a muni I used to play where there was a 95 year old who walked and carried his bag. dirt cheap to play too. So what is better? The modern trends suck.

[jstnrgrs]

Why does signing an incorrect scorecard a DQ? This was obviously an accadent. Why can they just fix her score, and place her accordingly? This rule is rediculous.

[fingokra]

shirely ewe gest

[HDPM]

It is only a DQ if you sign for a score on a hole lower than what you made. Higher and the score stands. The player is responsible for checking that the score for each hole is correct. Not adding it. She signed for a wrong score because she didn't add the penalty for the drop. Sometimes the rule has a brutal application, but it has always been the rule and all the players know it. It is also a better rule because you have to get things right and not change them after the fact. IMO it is the only way it can work in practice. You can't go amending scores; it would be a mess.

[jstnrgrs]

[ QUOTE ]
It is only a DQ if you sign for a score on a hole lower than what you made. Higher and the score stands. The player is responsible for checking that the score for each hole is correct. Not adding it. She signed for a wrong score because she didn't add the penalty for the drop. Sometimes the rule has a brutal application, but it has always been the rule and all the players know it. It is also a better rule because you have to get things right and not change them after the fact. IMO it is the only way it can work in practice. You can't go amending scores; it would be a mess.

[/ QUOTE ]

In every other sport, someone else keeps score.

In this situation, it seems that Wie didn't even know that she had incured a penalty. Someone should be required to inform her of this, so that she CAN fill out her scorecard correctly.

It would take all of about 30 seconds to ammend her score. What a mess indeed.

[HDPM]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It is only a DQ if you sign for a score on a hole lower than what you made. Higher and the score stands. The player is responsible for checking that the score for each hole is correct. Not adding it. She signed for a wrong score because she didn't add the penalty for the drop. Sometimes the rule has a brutal application, but it has always been the rule and all the players know it. It is also a better rule because you have to get things right and not change them after the fact. IMO it is the only way it can work in practice. You can't go amending scores; it would be a mess.

[/ QUOTE ]

In every other sport, someone else keeps score.

In this situation, it seems that Wie didn't even know that she had incured a penalty. Someone should be required to inform her of this, so that she CAN fill out her scorecard correctly.

It would take all of about 30 seconds to ammend her score. What a mess indeed.

[/ QUOTE ]

Golf is not every other sport. The essence of golf is that the competitors compete with a proper sense of sportsmanship. Competitors must keep score honestly and call penalties on themselves. A higher standard of conduct exists in golf. If this ever goes away, golf will lose what has made it a great sport. Competitors are charged with knowing the rules and abiding by them. Period. And that means calling things on yourself. As Kevin Stadler did this weekend. That was the real rules decision. He called himself on a rule people forget about. The Tour did everything it could to prevent a DQ but the rules are clear that a DQ was in order. It will likely cost him his tour card. Golf is not about getting away with it.

[Weatherhead03]

It's call a rule. This rule has stood for decades and im sure she knew the consequences of breaking the rule. Golf is a game about integrity and signing your score for a lower score than it actually is results in a DQ. Thats just the way it is.