Right Martin has an advantage over him having to walk 18 holes but the court is saying he doesn't get an advantage on the field which I believe to be true.
Again, that may be true but isn't really the issue I have. Whether the courts got that right or not, they should not be in the business of leveling the playing field in pro sports for disabled persons. Either you can play the sport by the rules of the sport, or you can't. I see no sense in the courts getting involved trying to equalize things. As has been pointed out, the logical conclusion of that is that any disabled or injured golfers should be given similar advantages, up to but not exceeding the inherent advantage that non-injured non-disabled golfers have over them. Seems silly to me. Such things are impossible to quantify.
You can say the floodgates were never opened, that injured golfers didn't come out in droves trying to get carts, and yeah, maybe they never will. But that doesn't mean the decision was the correct one.