Elevation Measuring Device - Did They Get This Rule Wrong?

[DeadMan]

12 hours ago, jshots said:

I am surprised that so far everyone has agreed that elevation measurement should be illegal. I thought for sure that people would see it as similar enough to distance measuring.

You've always been able to figure out your distance someway on the golf course, even if it's simply by walking off the length of your shot. That's not true for elevation. Without these devices, I can't really think of a way to figure out elevation on the golf course. Before phones, you needed a pretty unique map or surveying equipment to do it.

[jshots]

Just now, DeadMan said:

You've always been able to figure out your distance someway on the golf course, even if it's simply by walking off the length of your shot. That's not true for elevation. Without these devices, I can't really think of a way to figure out elevation on the golf course. Before phones, you needed a pretty unique map or surveying equipment to do it.

Yes so technology has clearly changed that, anyone can get elevation measurements on a phone today. Not allowing elevation measuring devices only disadvantages those who didn't write them down before the start of the round (ie your average amateur).

Again, judging elevation change is not a "golf skill"... choosing a shot to play based on an elevation change is.

[GolfLug]

I see elevation change estimation a similar skill to reading green break. Operative word being 'skill'. 

Distance has always been part of provided base parameters. 'This hole is 358 yards, par 4'.

 

[DeadMan]

3 minutes ago, jshots said:

Yes so technology has clearly changed that, anyone can get elevation measurements on a phone today.

The point of the rule, though, is that you're allowed to use technology to do something faster, but not figure out something new. So, if it's reasonably possible to figure out something for yourself on the course, using technology to figure that out faster is okay. Distance is a good example of this. Compass direction is another good example of this. Elevation changes is not a good example of this.

(This is obviously very simplified, so don't read too much into it.)

[DrvFrShow]

Distance + slope devices are good for practice rounds when learning the course. 

[Buckeyebowman]

Oh! All the "Sturm und Drang"! You guys act like you're playing for millions on Tour! What are you trying to win? A quarter skin? Your club flight?

I grew up getting my yardages the old fashioned way, but I have nothing against new technology. I'm on a computer and on this forum after all! As long as this technology works to do what I want it to, I'm fine with that. I don't need to be an IT pro to appreciate it. 

As far as golf goes, I'd pace off my yardage and if it was uphill, I'd consider taking more club. If it was downhill, I'd consider taking less. Same with the wind. More important was how the shot "looked" to my eyes! It was kind of a subliminal process, but it worked remarkably well.

[iacas]

35 minutes ago, Buckeyebowman said:

Oh! All the "Sturm und Drang"! You guys act like you're playing for millions on Tour!

Nobody is doing that.

[Fourputt]

On 5/12/2019 at 8:02 PM, Buckeyebowman said:

Oh! All the "Sturm und Drang"! You guys act like you're playing for millions on Tour! What are you trying to win? A quarter skin? Your club flight?

I grew up getting my yardages the old fashioned way, but I have nothing against new technology. I'm on a computer and on this forum after all! As long as this technology works to do what I want it to, I'm fine with that. I don't need to be an IT pro to appreciate it. 

As far as golf goes, I'd pace off my yardage and if it was uphill, I'd consider taking more club. If it was downhill, I'd consider taking less. Same with the wind. More important was how the shot "looked" to my eyes! It was kind of a subliminal process, but it worked remarkably well.

I'm kind of with you on this, except I rarely even paced off a shot.  I think that too many amateurs take this whole distance thing too seriously.  It really doesn't take all that much figuring to add or subtract one club, or maybe just add one club choked down, etc., when dealing with wind or elevation changes.  It's an estimate, a "best guess", as it has always been in golf.  It's part of the "feel" side of the game that I've seen derided here in the past, but has always been an important aspect of golf.  All of this overly technical analysis is part of what is contributing to the pace of play issues. 

I get a reasonable distance, either from course markings that I have previously verified (I'm still a big fan of having clearly visible stakes at 200, 150, and 100 yards), or lacking that, I take a quick look at my Golf Pad GPS app.  I don't even have to be next to my ball when I do it... I can adjust adequately for a 5-10 yard offset by estimating the differences with my eye and experience.  I rarely miss by more than a couple of yards as compared to the laser that another player feels he has to use to be "more precise", as he then hits his shot nowhere near the yardage or direction that his sighting gave him.  And I will estimate what to add or subtract for conditions, then set up and play my shot while he's still screwing around with his calculations.

Some players are actually good enough that such precision is useful for them, but too many of us these days just waste time dithering instead of playing.