I was somewhat taken back when I read the article about the Robert Trent Jones Golf Trail in Alabama ("Trail Blazers," May).

In 1995, a fellow walking golfer and I decided to try the Trail. We each bought a weekly pass and booked starting times to play 36 holes per day at each of the seven locations. Our plans were to walk the first 18 holes and then take a cart the second 18 in that we were on a somewhat ambitious schedule.

There isn't a single walking golf course on the Trail. They are all cart courses. Unless you have played the Trail, you would not believe the distance between some greens and tees.

Now to the positive aspects of our sojourn. The employees of Sunbelt Golf Corp. treated us like visiting royalty. The holes were in immaculate condition and the food and beverages were excellent. The pace of play was to our liking in that we normally played 27 holes in the morning and nine holes after lunch.

Will I ever play the Trail again? No. Am I and the USGA spitting into the wind when we still think golf is a walking game? Probably, but I'm going to continue, as long as I can, walking my 250 or so rounds a year, pulling my pull cart, wearing golf shoes with metal spikes, playing with persimmon woods and forged irons and having a hell of a good time.

John A. Alexander
Marietta, Ga.

Agreeing to disagree

I am in my 50s and have been playing golf for a long time. Perhaps I am getting old or crusty, or both, but I feel the USGA is becoming an organization for the elite. Your position on electronic distance measuring devices is understandable if I were a pro who has a caddie who knows the yardage, suggests clubs, lines up putts, rakes bunkers, replaces divots, tends flagsticks, cleans balls and clubs. Or if the course had yardage markers on virtually all sprinkler heads, used different colored flags for hole locations, had detailed yardage books, marked off ground under repair, didn't require carts, had caddies and forecaddies or didn't restrict carts to paths.

Am I supposed to believe that using an electronic distance measuring device on a public course is in any way an unfair advantage or violates the spirit of the game any more than the items listed above? Let us level the playing field.

Thomas L. Carroll
Bartlett, Ill.

I am afraid the article came up just a tad short in resolving the problems attendant to the EDM devices. I am aware that Jeff Hall was attempting to resolve a situation that has been somewhat mishandled by both the USGA and the makers of such devices. I would like to see the matter concisely defined and enforced by the USGA.

At the risk of adding further to the confusion, I do feel that there seems to be somewhat of a double standard when PGA Tour players are allowed to use yardage books that spell out distances no less precisely than do the EDM devices. Is this not just one more instance of hairsplitting?

Bill Fathauer
Charles City, Iowa

The referee article in May confuses more than it clarifies. Unless you define what constitutes an artificial device or unusual equipment, you beg the question.

Certainly yardage plates affixed in a fairway or attached to posts or trees are artificial devices, and the first time they appeared they were unusual equipment.

You are trying to justify banning one thing while allowing another when, truth is, either they all should be allowed or they all should be banned.

Just suppose I had a crew of helpers and a 600-yard tape measure and I could avoid any interference with the players in front or behind me. Could I measure the distance to the hole for each shot or does a tape measure fall within the purview of prohibited devices? And if so, why not the yardage plates? Talk about trying to have your cake and eat it, too.

I sincerely hope you will rethink your position on this as the present one is not really tenable.

Stuart Godwin Jr.
Chestertown, Md.

Jeff Hall, the USGA's assistant director for the Rules of Golf, responds: Under the Rules of Golf as presently written, yardage markers and books are not considered artificial devices or unusual equipment. However, when both first appeared in the game, I am sure they were evaluated using the equivalent of present-day Rule 14-3. The evolutionary process of amending the Rules of Golf may someday permit the use of EDM devices, but the process is not yet at that point. I can assure you that the Rules Committees of both the USGA and Royal and Ancient are monitoring this issue. As for the use of the tape measure, it would certainly constitute an artificial device if used in the fashion you describe.

If the Rules do not permit the use of EDM devices, why should rounds played with them be posted for handicap purposes? It would seem that if you want me to post scores for rounds in which I've used an EDM device, and therefore haven't followed the Rules, you'd also want me to post scores if I carry 18 clubs in my bag, give myself six-foot putts and drop a ball at the spot where a drive goes out of bounds.

Henry Lohr
Madison, Wis.

Kevin O'Connor, the USGA's director of handicapping, responds: Quite often golfers claim it is difficult to obtain a handicap index because we require a minimum of five scores. Other golfers with established handicap indexes comment that they are playing constantly, but no scores can be posted because the scores are not acceptable for handicap purposes. Therefore, the USGA has made it a goal to try to find as many ways as possible to allow a player to have acceptable scores for handicap purposes. In order to be so inclusive regarding scores, there are times when the Handicap System differs slightly from the Rules of Golf, including rounds with measuring devices. If we were to require that a score must be in absolute compliance with the Rules of Golf in order to be acceptable for handicap purposes, we would have fewer scores, older data and a more difficult time predicting a player's potential scoring ability.

More on Martin

I'm sure Casey Martin is a great guy but I have to disagree with him. It makes me irate to see a letter from a guy who talks about "leveling the playing field." What in the world does that mean? I think it means that in America, no matter what the situation, if you are for any reason less than that, we will cheat so that you will measure up. Is it sad that he can't walk? Yes. Does it seem unfair? Yes. Should he ride a cart? No. This is the place where the best golfers in the world compete. There will be no leveling.

Peter Kouten
Charleston, S.C.

Give credit

In the "recuperation in Progress" story (Through the Green, May), the discussion of golf course re-openings from flood damage lacks the input of the individual most responsible for maintenance of the course — the golf course superintendent. While the golf course owner, manager and professional are appropriate contacts for numerous issues, I don't believe they are the best sources for explaining the techniques to bring a course back to playable condition.

I seriously doubt that the pro at Lincoln Park washed the greens, tilled and reseeded them. This may seem a minor point in the grand scheme of things, but I believe the GCSAA must take every opportunity and rely on the help of others to educate the public on the role of the superintendent. I doubt yours, or any other publication, would go to the superintendent to ask for tips on swing mechanism, merchandise or equipment. The opportunity for the superintendent to explain course conditions and maintenance is a great means to educate and clear any misconceptions held by the public.

Jeff Bollig
Senior Manager of Media/Public Relations
Golf Course Superintendents Association of America
Lawrence, Kan.

Expensive fun

Several years ago, I had the good fortune to play several courses in the San Francisco area, including Lincoln Park. The view from the 17th hole cast its spell over members of our group and we began to knock a few golf balls into the bay "just to watch them sail the 200 to 300 feet down to the water."

While discussing the day's activities in the parking lot afterward, a kind gentleman stopped to tell us that while it was a lot of fun to knock shots into the bay, it was also a $500 fine for each ball.

While I have never bothered to verify this, I was certainly not going to push my luck to find out. Your June cover shot reminded me of my brush with a $1,000 round of golf.

I would appreciate it if you would please sign this letter,

name and address withheld
to protect the innocent

The last word

The may issue of Golf Journal was undoubtedly the best ever. Every article and story was first class. "The Gentle Hustler" was especially outstanding; only golf could generate such a poignant story.

Of course, I may be prejudiced toward this particular edition as my name just happens to be listed in it as one of the 31 quizmasters.

Larry Cofer
Jacksonville, N.C.