Rangefinders on the PGA Tour?

[Shindig]

I'm for it.  I'm not convinced it will speed up play -- I think they'll figure out the distance the way they do now, confirm with a range finder (or perhaps the other order), and if the two disagree, it might actually slow things down.  But I think it should be allowed. 

[Vinny Cap]

7 minutes ago, iacas said:

They do want to speed up golf.

I'm not saying rangefinders will do it, but TV people do want to speed up golf. That's known.

I didn't know that.  I thought they like the long time slot as it offers more time for commercials.  I don't mind it taking so long on TV as I am either into it or falling asleep, doesn't seem to be any in between ground for me.

[iacas]

3 minutes ago, Vinny Cap said:

I didn't know that.  I thought they like the long time slot as it offers more time for commercials.  I don't mind it taking so long on TV as I am either into it or falling asleep, doesn't seem to be any in between ground for me.

They can fill the time with other things. It's not like they'd have dead air. Which is what most Sunday telecasts are, actually… dead air between shots.

[Vinny Cap]

6 minutes ago, iacas said:

They can fill the time with other things. It's not like they'd have dead air. Which is what most Sunday telecasts are, actually… dead air between shots.

They could show more golfers shooting not just the top 5.  That would fill more space and keep me watching.

As long as Gary McCord is on color commentary, the filler is awesome.

[iacas]

A Gary McCord fan? I think it's clear we won't agree on much.

[Elmer]

I would like to think that using a range finder would allow them to get the exact distance and enable the golfer to make a quicker decision on club & shot selection.
I would also like to think that exact yardage reading would allow the golfers to have spot on shots.
I would hope all of this would speed up play!
But as many on the forum have pointed out, I have been wrong before!

[JxQx]

I think they should be able to use them. There isn't any really good reason for them not to that I can think of.

[newtogolf]

The only people that should be against use of rangefinders are yardage book manufacturers.  If they used on it would be without slope so they would still have to consider the impact of slope, wind and hazards on their shot making decisions.  

Their yardage books are so detailed it's not like they are guessing distances today and I'm sure some of the older guys who have accumulated a lot of data in their books would still reference them to some level.  

We all talk about wanting to play the same game, as amateurs, we can and do use rangefinders so why shouldn't the pro's.  

[Jeremie Boop]

40 minutes ago, Elmer said:

I would like to think that using a range finder would allow them to get the exact distance and enable the golfer to make a quicker decision on club & shot selection.
I would also like to think that exact yardage reading would allow the golfers to have spot on shots.
I would hope all of this would speed up play!
But as many on the forum have pointed out, I have been wrong before!

I don't think using the range finder would speed up club and shot decisions. As someone mentioned previously, they typically come up with the yardages pretty quickly and the majority of the time before the shot is the discussion of wind, elevation, lie, landing area, potential roll out or spin, etc. I'm not against them using range finders, I just don't see it making any difference in pace of play.

[ScouseJohnny]

1 hour ago, Vinny Cap said:

I think they try to keep it as Old School as possible.  If they wanted to speed up golf, they would be using golf carts, GPS, Rangefinders

And wouldn't that look ugly?

Edited July 28, 2016 by ScouseJohnny

[Elmer]

2 hours ago, Vinny Cap said:

 

I think they try to keep it as Old School as possible.  If they wanted to speed up golf, they would be using golf carts, GPS, Rangefinders and playing ready golf. 

I think if they are going to keep it old school, get rid of yardage books and get rid of caddies.

Make the golfers carry/push their own clubs and use on course yardage markers!

Lets see how good these pros really are!

[Fourputt]

2 hours ago, seanoando said:

well considering that they use robots to make the yardage books, I hardly think having a correct yardage has anything to do with an individual's preformance or skill. Rangefinders wouldn't make golf easier, just faster

I think that this is just wishful thinking.  Using a rangefinder during the round won't eliminate the yardage book, it will just add yet another thing for them to do before they get around to taking the shot.  They get just as accurate yardages right now, only the caddies do the rangefinder work on Monday and Tuesday to verify and make adjustments to what they have in the yardage book.  They will still do all of the discussion and analyzing before picking a club.  

To think that adding another piece of planning equipment to their on course process will make them play faster is naive.

[turtleback]

25 minutes ago, Elmer said:

I think if they are going to keep it old school, get rid of yardage books and get rid of caddies.

Make the golfers carry/push their own clubs and use on course yardage markers!

Lets see how good these pros really are!

How can something that has never been part of the game (no caddy rule) be old school?  Do you even know what old school means?  It does not mean your own particular predilections, it means how they did it "back in the day".  And "back in the day" they had caddies and used yardage books (Dean Beaman was one of the first and taught Jack Nicklaus about them, which puts us at 50+ years of yardage book use - longer than most folks on this board have been playing).

[Golfingdad]

4 hours ago, boogielicious said:

"I know the rangefinger reads it's 176 to carry that bunker, but you better walk it off just in case." 

 

15 minutes ago, Fourputt said:

I think that this is just wishful thinking.  Using a rangefinder during the round won't eliminate the yardage book, it will just add yet another thing for them to do before they get around to taking the shot.  They get just as accurate yardages right now, only the caddies do the rangefinder work on Monday and Tuesday to verify and make adjustments to what they have in the yardage book.  They will still do all of the discussion and analyzing before picking a club.  

To think that adding another piece of planning equipment to their on course process will make them play faster is naive.

Yeah, this is kind of what I was getting at earlier.  These guys are so detailed and so thorough that I was thinking that adding rangefinders would be just that - adding.  None of the other stuff they do would change, it would just be one extra little check on their numbers.  Knowing how easy it is to accidentally shoot the wrong item sometimes, they wouldn't leave that to chance.

I don't think it would really add time because it takes all of 4 seconds to shoot a flag, but it might not speed play up either.

I still think that they should try and see.  It's not going to hurt anything.

[boogielicious]

3 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

 

Yeah, this is kind of what I was getting at earlier.  These guys are so detailed and so thorough that I was thinking that adding rangefinders would be just that - adding.  None of the other stuff they do would change, it would just be one extra little check on their numbers.  Knowing how easy it is to accidentally shoot the wrong item sometimes, they wouldn't leave that to chance.

I don't think it would really add time because it takes all of 4 seconds to shoot a flag, but it might not speed play up either.

I still think that they should try and see.  It's not going to hurt anything.

"Better hurry up with that yardage Bones. We've only got 20 seconds left on the shot clock." 

That would fix it!

[Pretzel]

1 hour ago, Fourputt said:

To think that adding another piece of planning equipment to their on course process will make them play faster is naive.

This is wrong, rangefinders are much more efficient than using the yardage book to find a distance.

Current option:

Well, it's 175 yards from the line between these two trees to the front of the green, and the pin is back seven paces off the front. After pacing off the distance from the line between the two trees to the ball it is 168 yards from the front and thus 176 yards from the hole. Cue discussion about wind, etc.

With rangefinders:

Well, it's 176 yards to the pin and 168 yards to clear the lip of the front bunker. Cue discussion about wind, etc.

You're eliminating the need to pace off every shot from known landmarks and giving caddies the opportunity to instantly have the exact distance for their players when they get to the golf ball. I can tell you right now that the caddies take at least 20-30 seconds pacing off distances and consulting the yardage book when they get to the ball as is. If they had rangefinders the yardage book would be used primarily as a visual aid so that players know where not to miss, where to aim, etc. instead of using them as an inefficient and slow method of distance measurement.

You're not adding a piece of equipment. You're replacing an antiquated piece of distance measuring equipment with a much more efficient and accurate piece of equipment. The hemming and hawing over conditions will still exist but the distance will be given much quicker than with a yardage book. People will still use yardage books to have a better view of the lay of the course, but they will still get their distances faster by using a rangefinder.

I would counter by saying that any pro who would try to use both a rangefinder AND a yardage book for on-course distances is naive. The yardage book is created with that rangefinder, meaning that the yardage book is, at best, only as accurate as the rangefinder is (and is most likely less accurate due to interpretation). Do you honestly think the professionals are stupid enough to use a yardage book when they have decimal point accuracy in the palm of their hand and in half the time, if that were to be an option available to them? Because you're telling me that they'll use both when you say you're adding another piece of equipment, rather than just replacing an old and outdated piece of equipment with a much improved piece of equipment.

[Golfingdad]

26 minutes ago, Pretzel said:

This is wrong, rangefinders are much more efficient than using the yardage book to find a distance.

Current option:

Well, it's 175 yards from the line between these two trees to the front of the green, and the pin is back seven paces off the front. After pacing off the distance from the line between the two trees to the ball it is 168 yards from the front and thus 176 yards from the hole. Cue discussion about wind, etc.

With rangefinders:

Well, it's 176 yards to the pin and 168 yards to clear the lip of the front bunker. Cue discussion about wind, etc.

You're eliminating the need to pace off every shot from known landmarks and giving caddies the opportunity to instantly have the exact distance for their players when they get to the golf ball. I can tell you right now that the caddies take at least 20-30 seconds pacing off distances and consulting the yardage book when they get to the ball as is. If they had rangefinders the yardage book would be used primarily as a visual aid so that players know where not to miss, where to aim, etc. instead of using them as an inefficient and slow method of distance measurement.

You're not adding a piece of equipment. You're replacing an antiquated piece of distance measuring equipment with a much more efficient and accurate piece of equipment. The hemming and hawing over conditions will still exist but the distance will be given much quicker than with a yardage book. People will still use yardage books to have a better view of the lay of the course, but they will still get their distances faster by using a rangefinder.

I would counter by saying that any pro who would try to use both a rangefinder AND a yardage book for on-course distances is naive. The yardage book is created with that rangefinder, meaning that the yardage book is, at best, only as accurate as the rangefinder is (and is most likely less accurate due to interpretation). Do you honestly think the professionals are stupid enough to use a yardage book when they have decimal point accuracy in the palm of their hand and in half the time, if that were to be an option available to them? Because you're telling me that they'll use both when you say you're adding another piece of equipment, rather than just replacing an old and outdated piece of equipment with a much improved piece of equipment.

I don't think this is really a counter to what @Fourputt is saying.  I completely agree with you in regards especially to:

26 minutes ago, Pretzel said:

You're eliminating the need to pace off every shot ...

However, eliminating the need doesn't mean that the pros and their caddies would stop doing it.  How many pros still plumb bob?

[Fourputt]

3 hours ago, Pretzel said:

This is wrong, rangefinders are much more efficient than using the yardage book to find a distance.

Current option:

Well, it's 175 yards from the line between these two trees to the front of the green, and the pin is back seven paces off the front. After pacing off the distance from the line between the two trees to the ball it is 168 yards from the front and thus 176 yards from the hole. Cue discussion about wind, etc.

With rangefinders:

Well, it's 176 yards to the pin and 168 yards to clear the lip of the front bunker. Cue discussion about wind, etc.

You're eliminating the need to pace off every shot from known landmarks and giving caddies the opportunity to instantly have the exact distance for their players when they get to the golf ball. I can tell you right now that the caddies take at least 20-30 seconds pacing off distances and consulting the yardage book when they get to the ball as is. If they had rangefinders the yardage book would be used primarily as a visual aid so that players know where not to miss, where to aim, etc. instead of using them as an inefficient and slow method of distance measurement.

You're not adding a piece of equipment. You're replacing an antiquated piece of distance measuring equipment with a much more efficient and accurate piece of equipment. The hemming and hawing over conditions will still exist but the distance will be given much quicker than with a yardage book. People will still use yardage books to have a better view of the lay of the course, but they will still get their distances faster by using a rangefinder.

I would counter by saying that any pro who would try to use both a rangefinder AND a yardage book for on-course distances is naive. The yardage book is created with that rangefinder, meaning that the yardage book is, at best, only as accurate as the rangefinder is (and is most likely less accurate due to interpretation). Do you honestly think the professionals are stupid enough to use a yardage book when they have decimal point accuracy in the palm of their hand and in half the time, if that were to be an option available to them? Because you're telling me that they'll use both when you say you're adding another piece of equipment, rather than just replacing an old and outdated piece of equipment with a much improved piece of equipment.

As I said, you are naive to think that they would use the the rangefinder in place of something else.  They will use every bit of equipment available to them and just add the rangefinder to the list.