News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Jeremy_Glenn.

European metric system.
« on: March 14, 2003, 07:26:29 AM »
A quick question to our friends across the pond:

We're designing a course in europe, where we know they use the metric system.  Now as far as marketing goes, here in Canada (and in the USA), 7,000 yards is a kind of mental barrier that many developers want to reach.  I was wondering if there was the same sort of barrier in the metric system, and if so, what is it?

The reason I ask is that our current routing falls at 6,385 metres.  Is 6,400 metres (7,000yds) a barrier?  Or would it be more 6,000 metres and 6,500 metres?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

RT

Re: European metric system.
« Reply #1 on: March 14, 2003, 07:52:51 AM »
What ever you do Jeremy be sure it's a par-72.  On the continent they are hung up on par-72.  Seventy two, septante deux (CH), soixante dix deux(FR), etc..no matter what the site...

RT
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

lesueur

Re: European metric system.
« Reply #2 on: March 14, 2003, 09:34:16 AM »
Jeremy,

Although we work in metric over here, golf courses (even new ones) are still measured primarily in yards, ie score cards and marketing material will quote yardages. Therefore, the mental barriers are probably very similar to the ones in the States.

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Brian Phillips

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: European metric system.
« Reply #3 on: March 14, 2003, 11:33:42 AM »
Jeremy,

Do you need a European sidekick...?

I do not agree with Le Sueur.  It depends what country you go to.  In Scandinavia it's all metric and no one cares about barriers or whether or not it is par 72 or not.  Just make it good and they will play it.

I can't speak for the rest of Europe as I have not worked anywhere but Scandinavia.

Cheers

Brian.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Bunkers, if they be good bunkers, and bunkers of strong character, refuse to be disregarded, and insist on asserting themselves; they do not mind being avoided, but they decline to be ignored - John Low Concerning Golf

Ville Nurmi

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: European metric system.
« Reply #4 on: March 15, 2003, 01:42:05 AM »
In Finland we don´t have any barriers as you call them. Most succesful courses in recent years have been quite short also.

What course is Eislahti. I think you have the name wrong.

Best,

Ville from Finland
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Matthew Mollica

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: European metric system.
« Reply #5 on: March 15, 2003, 05:28:09 AM »

Hi Jeremy.

I live in Australia, where the metric system is universally accepted.

I know what you mean re: barrier, but I wouldn't get hung up on it all that much. It is only a small consideration in the grand scheme of things.

Having said that, in answer to the question, I think that the barrier you refer to would be somewhere near 6400-6500m.

For what it's worth, I think the cards for all golf courses, irrespective of country in which they're found, should be in yards. It would make it a fair bit easier for many people. It wouldn't be that hard to do either...

Matthew
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
"The truth about golf courses has a slightly different expression for every golfer. Which of them, one might ask, is without the most definitive convictions concerning the merits or deficiencies of the links he plays over? Freedom of criticism is one of the last privileges he is likely to forgo."

JThompson

Re: European metric system.
« Reply #6 on: March 15, 2003, 10:34:42 PM »
Mr. Glenn:  To hell with the Europeans.  The English world does not use the metric system.  Why bother.  Who cares about the length of a course measured in meters?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Jeremy_Glenn.

Re: European metric system.
« Reply #7 on: March 16, 2003, 07:59:31 AM »
Thanks for the replies.

We have ample room to get add another 200-300 yards in length if need be.  Of course, I'd be against it, since 6385 is what fits naturally.  But I could easily add 15 metres to get to 6400.

JThompson,

Go spread your offensive comments somewhere else.  For a new guy in town, you're not going to make any friends.
___

It is high time that the americans switch to the metric system.  The metric system has many advantages:

1) It is based on a factor of 10.  What's easier, multiplying by 10 or by 12?

2) The units of length, volume and weight are inter-related.   One litre = 1,000 cu.cm. = 1kg of water;  1 ton = 1,000kg;   1 hectare = 10,000 sq.m.

Here is a simple calculations we do on site:

Imperial A bunker is 2,000 sq.ft., with 4-inch depth of sand.  How many cu.yds. of sand do we need to bring in?   Answer:  I don't know, I don't have a calculator handy.  I'd have to divide 2,000 by 12 then multiply by 4 to get cu.inches, then divide that  by 27 to get cu.yds.  Metric A bunker is 200 sq.m. with 10 cm depth of sand.  How many cu.m. of sand do we need to bring in?  Answer:  20cu.m.  As we know, 10cm is 0.1m, so 200 sq.m * 0.1m = 20cu.m.

See what I mean?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:03 PM by -1 »

Jeff_Mingay

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: European metric system.
« Reply #8 on: March 16, 2003, 09:19:31 AM »
The English world doesn't use the metric system?

The United States is the only country left on this planet that doesn't use the metric system.

JThompson, there's an 'English world' outside the USA  :)

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
jeffmingay.com

Tim_Weiman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: European metric system.
« Reply #9 on: March 16, 2003, 11:13:53 AM »
Jeremy Glenn:

I hope our European friends will disregard the inappropriate, offensive comments that unfortunately became part of this thread.

There is a wealth of great golf architecture in Europe and I hope European participation in our discussion will increase.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Tim Weiman