I was up late last night with a cold that Nyquil couldn't soothe, so I went surfing and sniffling til the wee hours. I encountered another golf forum where a poster was making the observation that he felt the prestige and traditions of golf were disappearing due to all the developments in golf equipment. It caught my eye because he posted up a photo of my golf clubs and said that game improvement clubs such as the Cleveland Hi-Bore clubs (which I just received from my husband as a gift) bring in people that he felt shouldn't be playing golf.
OK, that really hit me hard. Could there be people in my golf club who look at someone's clubs and make an assessment that those kinds of people shouldn't be there? Then I thought, hmmm so what makes someone worthy enough to play golf? I love playing, my clubs made a huge difference in my enjoyment factor as now I am on the green in 2 or 3, not trying to tee off with a 6iron and whacking erratically down the fairway excited to get a +3. Sure I don't know all the obscure rules, but I do know to leave the green as I found it and to clean up and repair my occasional gopher pelts. Our club encourages Tee it up and Ready Golf, so we already do those things. I also let anyone play through or join me, and I don't spend 15 minutes looking for a ProV1 I slung in the woods. If I can't afford to lose the ball, then I should buy cheaper balls. I don't think equipment defines the person, but rather the persons actions are what defines the player. So I can't figure out why someone would think that "super game improvement" equipment shouldn't be made and how they attract a type of golfer that lowers the prestige of the the game.
Should I chalk up the sensitivity to some random internet rant to a nyquil haze, or is there really something valid in their comment that game improvement equipment opens the golf world up to people who would be better off not playing. Should I hide my Hi-bores in the closet and get some "proper" equipment and hate playing? And could anyone explain a logical connection between the type of equipment people play and their lack of respect for the game? I am new to this activity and don't want to offend anyone, so could your equipment somehow offend people or demean the sport?
OK, that really hit me hard. Could there be people in my golf club who look at someone's clubs and make an assessment that those kinds of people shouldn't be there? Then I thought, hmmm so what makes someone worthy enough to play golf? I love playing, my clubs made a huge difference in my enjoyment factor as now I am on the green in 2 or 3, not trying to tee off with a 6iron and whacking erratically down the fairway excited to get a +3. Sure I don't know all the obscure rules, but I do know to leave the green as I found it and to clean up and repair my occasional gopher pelts. Our club encourages Tee it up and Ready Golf, so we already do those things. I also let anyone play through or join me, and I don't spend 15 minutes looking for a ProV1 I slung in the woods. If I can't afford to lose the ball, then I should buy cheaper balls. I don't think equipment defines the person, but rather the persons actions are what defines the player. So I can't figure out why someone would think that "super game improvement" equipment shouldn't be made and how they attract a type of golfer that lowers the prestige of the the game.
Should I chalk up the sensitivity to some random internet rant to a nyquil haze, or is there really something valid in their comment that game improvement equipment opens the golf world up to people who would be better off not playing. Should I hide my Hi-bores in the closet and get some "proper" equipment and hate playing? And could anyone explain a logical connection between the type of equipment people play and their lack of respect for the game? I am new to this activity and don't want to offend anyone, so could your equipment somehow offend people or demean the sport?