yardage measuring device?

[motsco]

Any one thought of or know of a device other then a GPS to measure your yardage?  Something fast and easy to use just for yardage from the shot you hit?

Tom

[keb]

I have a Garmin S2 GPS watch.  It has setting that allows you to measure your shot.

[Fourputt]

Originally Posted by keb

I have a Garmin S2 GPS watch.  It has setting that allows you to measure your shot.

He said "other than a GPS".

I don't know of anything that would be practical on a golf course or practice range.

[ghalfaire]

Other than GPS there isn't an accurate and quick way to do this that I know of.  You could try a pedometer that walkers use but not sure how accurate they are and if you ride of course or can't walk straight to the ball they won't work.

[motsco]

Thanks guys,  I serched the net and looks like GPS is the way.

Reason I asked is that 2012 season i want to measure my on course distance with ever club and keep a log.

Tom

[sean_miller]

Originally Posted by motsco

Any one thought of or know of a device other then a GPS to measure your yardage?  Something fast and easy to use just for yardage from the shot you hit?

Tom

I use a laser rangefinder and it takes the same time (or less) as a GPS.  To be honest I've never seen someone use a GPS quickly and most people I know with rangefinders use them so quickly the other players don't even notice. GPS potentially gives more interesting information so there's more opportunity to dilly dally. With a rangefinder it's shoot then stow and go. Not the point of your thread though, so . . .

When I use a rangefinder, it looks like this:

Scenario 1: Hit the ball, then take a shot with a rangefinder of an obect in line with ball on the horizon. Walk to ball. When reaching the ball, shoot that object again. The difference is how far you've just hit the ball. If you hit the ball in line with the flagstick you can kill three birds with one stone - distance you just hit the ball, distance to the pin, and proof your course yardage markers are accurate, or not.

Scenario 2: Shoot an object perpendicular to your ball and if you're off in estimating which object to use, shoot or pace the difference.

Scenario 3 - the easiest one: Find an object near your ball that will be easy to shoot back to from your ball. For example, if the starter hut is 20 yards behind where you have your ball teed up, shoot back to the hut after reaching your ball, then subtract 20 yards. It's not rocket science.

[saevel25]

not a bad idea for the rangefinder.. Pedometer isn't a bad idea, if you know your own pacing. If you practice, you can get pretty accurate with it, maybe with in a few yards. The problem is going up and down hills. I think GPS is the best, in all terrain conditions..

[Ignorant]

Originally Posted by sean_miller

I use a laser rangefinder and it takes the same time (or less) as a GPS.  To be honest I've never seen someone use a GPS quickly and most people I know with rangefinders use them so quickly the other players don't even notice. GPS potentially gives more interesting information so there's more opportunity to dilly dally. With a rangefinder it's shoot then stow and go. Not the point of your thread though, so . . .

Sorry, Sean, but that is complete BS. A GolfBuddy or similar GPS device gives you the distance between yourself and any hazard and the front of green and the back of green and and and. And all this while you are walking. Plus the decive is attached to your trolley/cart so all you need is to read it. The most advanced devices record every stop and give you the distance of your shot and the distance you walked (or drove, if someone should be interested in that, for whatever reason...) after the round. All this data you can then download on your PC for further analysis.

Tom: Using a rangefinder in order to measure distances of a stroke is way too slow, difficult and inaccurate. Go and buy a GolfBuddy or similar.

[Ignorant]

Originally Posted by sean_miller

Scenario 1: Hit the ball, then take a shot with a rangefinder of an obect in line with ball on the horizon. Walk to ball. When reaching the ball, shoot that object again. The difference is how far you've just hit the ball. If you hit the ball in line with the flagstick you can kill three birds with one stone - distance you just hit the ball, distance to the pin, and proof your course yardage markers are accurate, or not.

I wonder how would you know that? You shoot the distance to the pin but the yardages on markers are to the centre of the green or to the front or any fixed point...

[sean_miller]

Originally Posted by Ignorant

Quote:

Originally Posted by sean_miller

I use a laser rangefinder and it takes the same time (or less) as a GPS.  To be honest I've never seen someone use a GPS quickly and most people I know with rangefinders use them so quickly the other players don't even notice. GPS potentially gives more interesting information so there's more opportunity to dilly dally. With a rangefinder it's shoot then stow and go. Not the point of your thread though, so . . .

Sorry, Sean, but that is complete BS. A GolfBuddy or similar GPS device gives you the distance between yourself and any hazard and the front of green and the back of green and and and. And all this while you are walking. Plus the decive is attached to your trolley/cart so all you need is to read it. The most advanced devices record every stop and give you the distance of your shot and the distance you walked (or drove, if someone should be interested in that, for whatever reason...) after the round. All this data you can then download on your PC for further analysis.

Tom: Using a rangefinder in order to measure distances of a stroke is way too slow, difficult and inaccurate. Go and buy a GolfBuddy or similar.

Why do you say such ridiculous things as facts?

I'm happy your GPS carrying playing partners are speedy. Unfortunately that has not been my experience. And if you can't get an accurate distance with a laser rangefinder, then you're doing something wrong.

[Ignorant]

Originally Posted by Ignorant

Sorry, Sean, but that is complete BS. A GolfBuddy or similar GPS device gives you the distance between yourself and any hazard and the front of green and the back of green and and and. And all this while you are walking. Plus the decive is attached to your trolley/cart so all you need is to read it. The most advanced devices record every stop and give you the distance of your shot and the distance you walked (or drove, if someone should be interested in that, for whatever reason...) after the round. All this data you can then download on your PC for further analysis.

Tom: Using a rangefinder in order to measure distances of a stroke is way too slow, difficult and inaccurate. Go and buy a GolfBuddy or similar.

Originally Posted by sean_miller

Why do you say such ridiculous things as facts?

I'm happy your GPS carrying playing partners are speedy. Unfortunately that has not been my experience. And if you can't get an accurate distance with a laser rangefinder, then you're doing something wrong.

Would you care to specify what was ridiculous and what was not a fact?

1) Fact: a rangefinder is more accurate than GPS when measuring distance from point A to point B. However, If you need to take two measurements (A to C and B to C) and deduct one reading from another accurately, then all these points A, B and C need to be on the same straight line. Should you hit your ball from point A 15 meters left and 10 meters short of pin the final distance of the shot cannot be measured accurately using the pin as reference point C. In such a case you would have to take several readings behind the green and remember all of them, just in case. Not to mention the time required to get these readings.

2) Fact: it takes time to remove the rangefinder from its holster, lift it before your eyes, take the reading and put the device back to its holster. This takes minimum 10 seconds. I know, I am using one regularly. If you need to take two measurements (A and B), then you need twice the time. A GPS you just need to give a glance for a reading, takes about 2-3 seconds. What you do NOT get is an accurate reading to the pin but this was not what Tom was looking for in his OP.

3) Fact: an advanced GPS device is attached to your trolley/cart and works with one single touch of one single button once you arrive to your ball. This takes one second. The device registrates its location each time and calculates the distance between these points, i.e. you get the distance of your every single shot, one second per shot.

4) Fact: the data collected by an advanced GPS device can be downloaded onto a PC for further analysis. This info you can find easily from the descriptions of such devices. In fact, you can even download an application on your iPhone to collect this data, although the accuracy is by far not as good as in decent GPS devices.

Pls. indicate which of these facts in your opinion are not facts.

[Ignorant]

Originally Posted by Ignorant

Sorry, Sean, but that is complete BS. A GolfBuddy or similar GPS device gives you the distance between yourself and any hazard and the front of green and the back of green and and and. And all this while you are walking. Plus the decive is attached to your trolley/cart so all you need is to read it. The most advanced devices record every stop and give you the distance of your shot and the distance you walked (or drove, if someone should be interested in that, for whatever reason...) after the round. All this data you can then download on your PC for further analysis.

Tom: Using a rangefinder in order to measure distances of a stroke is way too slow, difficult and inaccurate. Go and buy a GolfBuddy or similar.

Originally Posted by sean_miller

Why do you say such ridiculous things as facts?

I'm happy your GPS carrying playing partners are speedy. Unfortunately that has not been my experience. And if you can't get an accurate distance with a laser rangefinder, then you're doing something wrong.

Would you care to specify what was ridiculous and what was not a fact?

1) Fact: a rangefinder is more accurate than GPS when measuring distance from point A to point B. However, If you need to take two measurements (A to C and B to C) and deduct one reading from another accurately, then all these points A, B and C need to be on the same straight line. Should you hit your ball from point A 15 meters left and 10 meters short of pin the final distance of the shot cannot be measured accurately using the pin as reference point C. In such a case you would have to take several readings behind the green and remember all of them, just in case. Not to mention the time required to get these readings.

2) Fact: it takes time to remove the rangefinder from its holster, lift it before your eyes, take the reading and put the device back to its holster. This takes minimum 10 seconds. I know, I am using one regularly. If you need to take two measurements (A and B), then you need twice the time. A GPS you just need to give a glance for a reading, takes about 2-3 seconds. What you do NOT get is an accurate reading to the pin but this was not what Tom was looking for in his OP.

3) Fact: an advanced GPS device is attached to your trolley/cart and works with one single touch of one single button once you arrive to your ball. This takes one second. The device registrates its location each time and calculates the distance between these points, i.e. you get the distance of your every single shot, one second per shot.

4) Fact: the data collected by an advanced GPS device can be downloaded onto a PC for further analysis. This info you can find easily from the descriptions of such devices. In fact, you can even download an application on your iPhone to collect this data, although the accuracy is by far not as good as in decent GPS devices.

Pls. indicate which of these facts in your opinion are not facts.

[ghalfaire]

I always like these GPS Vs Laser discussions.  Here, FWEISW, is my knowledge and experience.

1) no question that in theory the Laser is more accurate, but it depends upon your ability to illuminate the intended target.  Not an easy task for some as it requires steady hands.  But I have friends that use them quite effectively.  There is a system called laser link that enhances the flag stick as laser target (reflectors) and uses a laser receiver that has been de-sensitizes so it does't "see" other targets.  But many courses don't have this system and of course the de-sensitized laser can't see other objects you might like to see and are useless on courses that don't have the laser link system.

2)  The GPS is, in theory, accurate to +/- a meter (metre) [probably significantly better than that using the differential between satellite readings] in locating your position on the Earth.  However the distance to specific targets depends upon the accuracy of the course survey which is also probably +/- a meter.  So you can expect in practice a worst case error of a couple of meters or so.  For you math majors this error is likely Gaussian and circularly distributed about zero error so most reading will be within a meter of perfect.  Not too bad for we double digit handicaps.

3)  My experience has been neither is quicker to use than the other, depends on the golfer.  But the GPS does give a lot of info with the press of a button that would require several readings with a laser.  In practice I find slow golfers are slow golfers not matter what distance measuring device they use or even if they use one at all.

So for me the bottom line is pick and use the one you like.  They both have some advantages and disadvantage.

But for the OP, my sky caddie has a Mark button.  You press it at the spot you hit the ball from and again when you arrive at the ball and it gives you the distance the ball traveled.  I would think this easier than using a laser, albeit arguably not as accurate.

[Ignorant]

Originally Posted by ghalfaire

I always like these GPS Vs Laser discussions.  Here, FWEISW, is my knowledge and experience.

1) no question that in theory the Laser is more accurate, but it depends upon your ability to illuminate the intended target.  Not an easy task for some as it requires steady hands.  But I have friends that use them quite effectively.  There is a system called laser link that enhances the flag stick as laser target (reflectors) and uses a laser receiver that has been de-sensitizes so it does't "see" other targets.  But many courses don't have this system and of course the de-sensitized laser can't see other objects you might like to see and are useless on courses that don't have the laser link system.

I have never had any problems with accuracy and the only time I cannot get a reading from the flag is that when there is no wind at all and the flag is glued to the pole. Certainly there may be quality differences between different laser devices. Mine has the PinSeeker function and it is very easy to use.

Originally Posted by ghalfaire

2)  The GPS is, in theory, accurate to +/- a meter (metre) [probably significantly better than that using the differential between satellite readings] in locating your position on the Earth.  However the distance to specific targets depends upon the accuracy of the course survey which is also probably +/- a meter.  So you can expect in practice a worst case error of a couple of meters or so.  For you math majors this error is likely Gaussian and circularly distributed about zero error so most reading will be within a meter of perfect.  Not too bad for we double digit handicaps.

There is no way you can get accuracy of +- 1 meter with normal GPS. A safe assumption is +-3 meters on the average. Quite enough to determine carry of any club, though.

Originally Posted by ghalfaire

3)  My experience has been neither is quicker to use than the other, depends on the golfer.  But the GPS does give a lot of info with the press of a button that would require several readings with a laser.  In practice I find slow golfers are slow golfers not matter what distance measuring device they use or even if they use one at all.

I have experienced a vast difference between GPS and RF. But you are right about slow players, they are slow no matter what.

Originally Posted by ghalfaire

But for the OP, my sky caddie has a Mark button.  You press it at the spot you hit the ball from and again when you arrive at the ball and it gives you the distance the ball traveled.  I would think this easier than using a laser, albeit arguably not as accurate.

My point exactly, although accuracy of a laser rangefinder depends on the situation, as I described earlier.

[sean_miller]

Originally Posted by Ignorant

Quote:

Originally Posted by bridgeview

no doubt if you know how to use it, it will speed up your game.

Indeed it does. I use my Bushnell all the time as it eliminates one of the uncertainty parameters and helps me pick up the right club faster.

Crazy enough, my home club does not allow any distance measuring devices to be used in competitions or hcp rounds. One of the reasons is that 'it slows down the game'. Obviously these guys have never used any such device... Obsolete old farts...

The OP was told by several posters that there is no way, other than GPS or a pedometer (that one made me laugh a bit) to tell the distance of his shots. I assumed he was talking about layups, approach shots, and tee shots. The distance of all these shots can be determined quite accurately and quickly with a rangefinder.

If people think the difference in distance between an object directly on the line of an object in the distance and one a couple meters off that line is significant, they're mistaken. If they feel there's more error involved than with a GPS they may or not be correct - depending on several factors.

To suggest it's a "slow" or difficult process is suggesting that remembering (or jotting down) one 2-3 digit number and subtracting another 2-3 digit number ~ 5 minutes later is a time consuming and/or laborious task.

The fact you're dissing the process of using a rangefinder is strange because in one thread they're awesome and in others you have no use for them. Heck, you're even flip flopping on the same page.

Have you ever actually set foot on a real golf course? A yard either way doesn't matter and ballpark numbers are enough to get a new player started. Any method (even the lowly pedometer) is a good way to confirm yardage markers and club selection. To single out one method as virtually useless is quite strange for any player, let alone an experienced one. As Ghalfaire said above, slow players will be slow either way, and one's experiences will certainly taint their opinion so just state a preference based on experience (lke I did), then let it go.

To argue so vehemently in random directions makes me strongly suspect you've never even played golf. Yeah, I just said that.

[Ignorant]

Originally Posted by sean_miller

To suggest it's a "slow" or difficult process is suggesting that remembering (or jotting down) one 2-3 digit number and subtracting another 2-3 digit number ~ 5 minutes later is a time consuming and/or laborious task.

The fact you're dissing the process of using a rangefinder is strange because in one thread they're awesome and in others you have no use for them. Heck, you're even flip flopping on the same page.

I don't think it is for anybody's benefit to start arguing things severely so I will not start that.

I have used my Bushnell Tour V2 for two years now and am perfectly aware what it does and what it does not and how much time it takes to use it (as a Rules Official I have timed the actions of various players on the course as well...). Also I'm pretty sure you know your own gear and have an idea how long it takes to get a reading.

I find it ridiculous to say that 10 seconds is shorter time than one second as this is the comparison between Bushnell and GolfBuddy when measuring distances. I find it even more ridiculous to say that 20 seconds is faster than 2 seconds. This is on a general level and is nothing personal.

It seems we have our strong opinions and they will not change here and now. Our experiences are different which is only natural and that is the way we form our opinions. I hope I have not offended you, this has not been my meaning.

[sean_miller]

Originally Posted by Ignorant

Quote:

Originally Posted by sean_miller

To suggest it's a "slow" or difficult process is suggesting that remembering (or jotting down) one 2-3 digit number and subtracting another 2-3 digit number ~ 5 minutes later is a time consuming and/or laborious task.

The fact you're dissing the process of using a rangefinder is strange because in one thread they're awesome and in others you have no use for them. Heck, you're even flip flopping on the same page.

I don't think it is for anybody's benefit to start arguing things severely so I will not start that.

I have used my Bushnell Tour V2 for two years now and am perfectly aware what it does and what it does not and how much time it takes to use it (as a Rules Official I have timed the actions of various players on the course as well...). Also I'm pretty sure you know your own gear and have an idea how long it takes to get a reading.

I find it ridiculous to say that 10 seconds is shorter time than one second as this is the comparison between Bushnell and GolfBuddy when measuring distances. I find it even more ridiculous to say that 20 seconds is faster than 2 seconds. This is on a general level and is nothing personal.

It seems we have our strong opinions and they will not change here and now. Our experiences are different which is only natural and that is the way we form our opinions. I hope I have not offended you, this has not been my meaning.

When I say I've never personally never seen anyone use a GPS of any kind in 2 seconds, I can't say for sure if the "GolfBuddy" was in use. Maybe GolfBuddy users are both fast and strealthy, because I'm still waiting for someone using a GPS to refrain from sharing the information they're collecting (because heaven knows I ain't asking). That would really speed up the process. BTW, 2 seconds versus 20 seconds isn't the sort of difference I was talking about in my first post and I think you're smart enough to know that. I mean. I'd like to believe that.

There are several ways to take a shot with a rangefinder (before even teeing off, while waiting for the green to clear, while waiting on another player who's very close) during a round that are pretty quick. Once an average player confirms their pacing is accurate within a yard or two per 50 yards, they really don't need to use a GPS or a rangefinder on familiar courses. I suppose top notch players or wild hitters who are often in uncharted territory might need one a lot.

And I shouldn't have suggested you've never actually set foot on a golf course since you're a rules a official.

[mdl]

Just to follow on Sean's point.  I've definitely been helped by playing partners with range finders or GPSs on unfamiliar courses.  But on familiar courses with some confidence in your pacing estimates, unless you're pretty much scratch it makes no difference whether you're lying 114 or 116.  I'd love to have the kind of distance control to have that matter, but really my current distance control outside of 80 yards is totally adequate to get me down to, say, a 5 or maybe even better, and it literally makes zero difference in the shot I'm going to play whether I have myself at 114 or 116, and on courses I know I can pretty easily get my yardage down to within an error range of +/- a couple yards with just course knowledge, markers, and pacing.

Speaking of range finders and GPSs, has anyone else noticed that a surprisingly high percentage of laser range finder users can't work them AT ALL.  It's gotta be at least 1/4 of the guys I've seen with laser sites who announce totally ridiculous readings like 1/2 the time and end up just going off the distance someone else walked off or found with a GPS.

And that sort of relates to the Sean/Ignorant debate.  I don't claim to have done any timing or anything, and I'd believe that a very proficient site user could be slightly faster on average than a GPS user, with more exact readings exactly to the flag than with front/center/back readings from the GPS, but I've seen so many guys who need to take 2 or 3 readings with the site that they are in fact much slower than the average GPS user.