[Gary_Nelson]

Adam,
I suppose private clubs can do what they want. But public courses aren't charities.  We can't fault the course owners for trying to pay the bills anyway they can (beer, carts, food, etc).   We can debate if cartball is golf but you'll get strong opposition from the majority of players here in Metro Detroit.

Shoot... I used to be a member at a private club with a caddy program.  All but a couple of my guests refused to walk with a caddy, preferring instead to ride.  Mind you that their choice had nothing to do with cost since they weren't paying for anything.  The course was an old-school easy-walk routing.

Carts are great for the bottom line but I don't think they hurt the game.  I think it is better to welcome the cartballers and increase the golfing population than eliminate carts and reduce the number of rounds played.

[ChasLawler]

Tom Huckaby - I'm very confused about the multiple of references you've made to the "lack of walkable terrain" in Northern California. Do you even understand what you're saying?

[Bill_McBride]

Ride a cart at Pasatiempo?  Do my ears deceive me?  Pasatiempo is one of the greatest walking courses ever.  The only climbs of note are #3, not bad, #4, pretty gentle, #5, ditto, #9, not bad, #11 gentle, what am I missing?

Now Wente (or Rancho San Marcos)............ those places should subsidize a pair of shuttle carts and drivers for those who want to walk.

Understanding the economics of golf today (I speak as chairman of the golf committee and member of the finance committee), golf courses have a hard time passing up the relatively profitable golf cart, so I don't have a problem with the fixed fee that includes a cart.  Just don't ever expect me to play when it's carts and cart paths both mandatory.

[THuckaby2]

Cabell:

There's a very good chance I have confused even myself.  

But let me try again.  We certainly do have courses that are easily and enjoyably walked here - the list is seemingly endless.  BUT... in terms of land available for development for new courses NOW, there is a dearth of flatter, non-mountainous terrain available anywhere near the urban areas.  The land available for golf course development always seems to be in a very hilly area, on a former landfill, or an area featuring many huge barrancas and canyons, or something that just plain doesn't make for an easy walk, whether golf is played on it or not!

Thus the new courses that do get built all seem to be on this type of terrain.  And since one cannot make a silk purse from a sow's ear, we get new courses that are very difficult to walk.

I take the point further from there, but it's been beaten to death too much already.  Can you understand it so far?

TH

[A_Clay_Man]

Adam,
I suppose private clubs can do what they want. But public courses aren't charities.  We can't fault the course owners for trying to pay the bills anyway they can (beer, carts, food, etc).  

Gary - The courses you are talking about are either very new or very poorly run. Most public courses have sunk cost so long ago, it's all profit. And the successful newer ones have had their nuts paid for in record time. (RC, Kingsbarns etc.)The problem seems to be those few courses built in era (and on inappropritate terrain) just about when the exisiting courses, were just starting to realize their windfall. 88'-94'. And that's why many jumped into the BUSINESS believeing ridiculous proformas and fast talking architects.

Blame it all on the Pebble Beach Syndrome. Ruined by a cart kid.

[THuckaby2]

Ride a cart at Pasatiempo?  Do my ears deceive me?  Pasatiempo is one of the greatest walking courses ever.  The only climbs of note are #3, not bad, #4, pretty gentle, #5, ditto, #9, not bad, #11 gentle, what am I missing?

Bill:  I admit the use of Pasa as an example here was for effect and really stretches things.  It is walkable.  I just have come to prefer taking a cart there, because in the CUMULATIVE, it makes for a very tiring walk.  So no, none of those climbs individually are all that bad... but add them all up, and it makes for a tiring day.

Think of the elevation change from #2 green (low point) to #12 tee (high point).  That is one severe hike!

So no, even in the best of terms, Pasa is not one of the greatest walking courses ever.  It's just too darn hilly.  The Old Course - now THAT is a great walking course.  Hell just about any links over there is a better walking course than Pasa.  This is not to say that Pasa is a BAD walking course, just that if one is eager to stretch a point and piss some people off, one could say one prefers to ride there.

 

[Gary_Nelson]

Tom,

You've mentioned a course near San Jose (The Ranch??) as a terrible routing with mile-long drives between holes.  I think you even mentioned that the goats had tethers to keep 'em from falling off the hills.  Did any of your playing partners say "cool!" after one of these long cart rides between holes?  

There is a course in Michigan with a half-mile (or more) ride on a bumpy wooden pathway thru the swamp/forest from #16 green to #17 tee.  The usual reaction is "wow, that was fun".  

I say good holes take precedence over walkability.  And if the holes are separated by a long distance, at least make the cart ride fun.

Gary

[Bill_McBride]

Thomas, have you played the Balcomie Links at Crail, 20 miles south of St Andrews?  Now THERE'S a hilly links course!  Fun fun fun.

And I still disagree about Pasatiempo.  The adrenaline flows, the blood pumps, it's a gradual thing.  It must be three miles walking from #2 green to #12 tee.  My god, man.  Think what you're saying!  

[THuckaby2]

Gary:

I cannot take credit for that which is not mine... it is the witty, loquacious and generally great raconteur Gib Papazian who wrote the line about the goats.  And he is so right....

But you raise a good question.  To date I have only played the course with a) a group of NCGA course raters, one of whom hated the course so much he said he was going to vomit, the other two of whom I believe secretly kinda liked it so didn't say much at all, out of deference to the more vociferous first one.... and b) by myself, in a late afternoon "I have nowhere else to go" quickie round.

So I don't know for sure what others would say... but you know what?  They might indeed find the rides to be fun, because they do involve a bit of driving skill... lots of switchbacks, a lot of downhill, some neat turns to be negotiated... I hadn't thought of it that way at all.  But yes, I admit it... cart rides can be fun and next time I play there, I will try to think of them in that light.  The course is so bad, one needs to find his fun somewhere and you just might have found it for me.

As for "I say good holes take precedence over walkability.  And if the holes are separated by a long distance, at least make the cart ride fun."  Well, you're not likely going to get much support here for that, but I can dig it.  That's the crux of my feeling about this issue also.  I understand the worth of "flow" and I also understand how disjointed a course can feel when holes are separated by too great a distance.  But as in my example of Wente, finding and using great golf holes trumps the loss of the good walk, for me.  Now of course the BEST courses have great golf holes AND are a good walk, but if a choice has to be made, give me the great golf holes.

And yes, if we are going to have a long trek, make the cart ride fun.  There is likely a skill to this as well!

TH

[Brian_Gracely]

A great example of a bad setup is Pinehurst #2.  HUGE green-fees include a cart, but it's cart-path only.  So it's bas enough that they include the cart-fee, since it very walkable, but they don't allow you to carry your own bag....caddies required (at $40 + tip).  

At least Pebble Beach, ridiculously expensive, lets you carry your own bag.  I'm sure Pinehurst #2 could get ugly on the greens if you were a 20+ handicap and read your own putts (or a 2 handicap on certain days), but at least they should offer the option.

[THuckaby2]

Thomas, have you played the Balcomie Links at Crail, 20 miles south of St Andrews?  Now THERE'S a hilly links course!  Fun fun fun.

And I still disagree about Pasatiempo.  The adrenaline flows, the blood pumps, it's a gradual thing.  It must be three miles walking from #2 green to #12 tee.  My god, man.  Think what you're saying!  

Bill, I have indeed played the Balcomie Links.  Yep, hilly indeed.  But not a bad walk... maybe because of the feeling that taking a cart over there is just plain sacrilege.  Now such feeling exists in CA, outside of Cypress and a few other great private clubs.

As for Pasa, I guess we shall have to agree to disagree.  I do find it a pretty tough walk, and as I get older, just do prefer to ride if given a chance.  That is, if others are riding, I no longer demand to walk, but rather just go along with them.  Also, if 36 is going to be the order of the day, I likely ride both rounds.

It is three miles from 2 green to 12 tee - that's the point!  And not three flat miles, but three miles up a pretty severe hill, not covered point to point, but with the normal double-backs that golf entails.  So yes, for me it is a tough walk.  Funny how most people do ride there also... Last I heard the percentage was something like 75.  I know, I asked last time there when I sheepishly asked for a cart.  

TH

[W.H. Cosgrove]

Sounds like #2 subsidizes the caddies with the cart fee.  Otherwise wouldn't caddies be more like $65!

This would be a much more palatable scenario for me!  

Nonetheless, the architectural problem remains, most new courses are tied to real estate development and creating a walkable course, while cramming in as many view lots as possible, takes a very creative designer.  

[Cliff Hamm]

Gary:

Complete concurrence here.  Good lord, for darn near everyone I know outside this forum, it's the other way around:  that is, take out the cart and it's not golf.  That's why although I do prefer to walk myself, I have a hard time understanding the other viewpoint, that with a cart it's not golf.  So many people look at it exactly opposite...



TH

Tom - totally agree.  Sometimes I feel that this board becomes way too judgemental.  Growing up I caddied at Baltusrol and I was 40 before I would wear shorts on the golf course and thought those that did just didn't get the game.  I was wrong.  I wouldn't be caught dead with a hat on backwards, but those that choose so, do not take away from enjoyment of this wonderful game.  The same with carts.  As I stated I always loved to walk but no longer am able to.  For those that prefer to ride so be it.  Why judge?  I do concur with many others that a cart fee should not be automatically included and I vehemtnly disagree with a carts only policy.  Requiring a caddy for walkers is fine and should be optional rather than a cart.  Finally for Tom Doak I am glad that Bandon and Pacific do have carts for those that need them.  I do wish though from what you said that they had more as there seems to be a demand if there is a wait to get one.  Anyway, reasonableness and flexibiility to cart policies are the keys, but cart path only clubs should be abolished as it only leads to slow play and one ends up walking as much if not more than they would have otherwise.

[Mike Benham]

And I still disagree about Pasatiempo.  The adrenaline flows, the blood pumps, it's a gradual thing.  It must be three miles walking from #2 green to #12 tee.  My god, man.  Think what you're saying!  

Oh Bill -

I gotta go with Huck on this one although I believe you are both passionately overstating your views ...

Mike

[THuckaby2]

Well in the last two days I've been said to be more wishy-washy and waffling than a Presidential candidate, AND passionately overstating my views.

Consistency remains my hallmark.  

Cliff:  sounds like we are simpatico, my friend.  Well said.

TH

[Cliff Hamm]

Tom

One of my favorite quotes is from Ralph Waldo Emerson - "Consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds".

Since we are in agreement obviously you do not have a little mind

Cliff

[THuckaby2]

Tom

One of my favorite quotes is from Ralph Waldo Emerson - "Consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds".

Since we are in agreement obviously you do not have a little mind

Cliff

 
You have made my day, Cliff.  Many thanks.  But not that it's likely to ever happen, but say I do disagree with you.. I'll assume my mind has re-shrunk, obviously!  

[Michael Plunkett]

I love to walk and I don't care if I have to pay the same price as a cart.  What I don't like are cart users that can't hit a ball on the fairway and still "complain" that walkers are slowing down the pace.  

I do use a cart for too many upscale courses. One solution is to shuttle walkers between the extreme greens to tees distances, some 1/2 mile or better. And... build walker paths, following the cart path may not be the best choice.  Better golf "boots," the old wing tips can't handle the walk anymore.
 

[Bill_McBride]

Good point about the "walking paths."  At Apache Stronghold, which is a stout but invigorating walk, the cart paths go way out of the way but at the front of every tee there is a path that leads directly out onto the fairway.  I did wonder as I hiked along some of those paths through the native areas, "any snakes out here?"  You have to know there were!  

[DMoriarty]

I guess it's just a NorCal thing.  It really seems that every new course that gets built is on severe terrain or in a very outlying area, because all the walkable terrain anywhere near where people live just can't be made into golf courses - it's either gone or prohibitively expensive for such.

Tom, did it ever occur to you that developers might favor difficult cart-ball sites?  My guess is that most never give a first thought to finding a suitable site for walkable golf.  

As for the rest of your post, the more spirited part, where did it go?   When you first posted . . . well you know the flavor and tone of the original message.   So you left that up for quite a while, and then you delete it?  Weak.  

As we both know, this is far from the first time you've pulled posts on me.  Anything else I might have missed.

Tell me . . . how is one to respond to the posts you later sneak away?   Do you think it appropriate to throw out strongly worded and critical posts without allowing a response?  Surely you dont think we are all at leisure to constantly monitor this site and to immediately respond and respond and respond?



Now what was it that we were discussing?  After sifting through all your posts I'm not sure I remember . . . .  If you count the ones you deleted, you are on one of your rolls!  

Warning:  While many will read this post I might just delete it before you get a chance to see it.  

[TEPaul]

I'm not going to get into riding vs walking as a policy of any course but if the architecture is equal I'd always give a huge edge to a golf course that's tight from green to next tee vs one that has long commutes to next tees. It's not only because tight green to next tee courses are convenient to walk it's also because I think I know enough about routing and architecture at this point to understand it's also generally harder for the architect to do in a routing sense. It's sort of like a jigsaw puzzle---a tight course green to next tee is like having the pieces of the puzzle fitted together nicely but some of these cart routings are like the jigsaw puzzle pieces spread out all over the table!

[David_Madison]

There's one more variant that hasn't been mentioned here. It seems to me that on most country club and upscale courses where walking is allowed, one can only walk with a caddy or if we carry our clubs. Let's take caddies out of this for the moment due to availability or cost. That leaves us having to carry our clubs or playing cartgolf. Many of us are physically unable to comfortably carry our clubs. But with the availability of the new $150- $200 3-wheeled push carts, where they practically roll by themselves seemingly even uphill (I know that's not possible, but the improvements have been huge), this pushes a lot of us back into the group that can once again walk. It also makes a number of courses walkable that might not easily be otherwise. My club, which is fairly hilly and not an easy carry course, allows these as well as battery driven pushcarts. I'd guess that close to half our members own one or the other. We play as fast or faster than those in driving carts, and we have a few long treks from greens to tees. If it's strictly an economic issue from a course's perspective, why not rent out for $12 or so the motorized versions of these carts? The net would be the same as with a driving cart. I know that among many traditionalists there's a stigma, something not macho or appropriate about seeing an army of these pushcarts scattered about a course, but maybe it's time to just get past that. After all, which is more traditional - - walking with a pushcart, or cartgolf?    

[A_Clay_Man]

David- Good points, but the "macho" comment doesn't jibe with the physical restrictions on carrying.

Caddy programs would fail instantly, if private clubs didn't have their rules.

One other thing I loathe, is the ettiquette that cartballers don't have. Living in the heart of "Cowboy Golf" I can sum it up this way. Rush rush rush, just to watch some A-hole take way too long for a pre-ball routine.
Often I'll refuse to play my next shot, if some jerk decides he has to get ahead. (ask seve) Now, that's slows things down even more, but ya know what? It's worth it to stand-up for my rights to have this jerk follow the guidelines on page #1 of the rulebook.

[THuckaby2]

I guess it's just a NorCal thing.  It really seems that every new course that gets built is on severe terrain or in a very outlying area, because all the walkable terrain anywhere near where people live just can't be made into golf courses - it's either gone or prohibitively expensive for such.

Tom, did it ever occur to you that developers might favor difficult cart-ball sites?  My guess is that most never give a first thought to finding a suitable site for walkable golf.  

As for the rest of your post, the more spirited part, where did it go?   When you first posted . . . well you know the flavor and tone of the original message.   So you left that up for quite a while, and then you delete it?  Weak.  

As we both know, this is far from the first time you've pulled posts on me.  Anything else I might have missed.

Tell me . . . how is one to respond to the posts you later sneak away?   Do you think it appropriate to throw out strongly worded and critical posts without allowing a response?  Surely you dont think we are all at leisure to constantly monitor this site and to immediately respond and respond and respond?



Now what was it that we were discussing?  After sifting through all your posts I'm not sure I remember . . . .  If you count the ones you deleted, you are on one of your rolls!  

Warning:  While many will read this post I might just delete it before you get a chance to see it.  

David:

Yes, I did a more strongly worded post, left it up for a grand total of about 5 minutes, thought better of it, and deleted it, because it really wasn't what I cared to say, after giving the matter proper thought.  Rest assured it was not insulting or harmful to you in any way.  What it was was acrimonious, and I tire of acrimony - with you and with anyone, really.  So I took it down and posted what I did.

I also checked to see if you were on-line before I deleted it... The thinking being that if you were there to see it, I'd leave it up and take my medicine, and if you were not - which you weren't, then no harm would be done by taking it down.  

I suppose this is weak.  I ought to use the preview before I post.  But I never do that, for whatever reason... It's just as easy for me to see it in the thread and then modify it.

But we've argued about THIS before also, yes.  And again, I am wrong.

So once again, I am suitably chastised.  

As for this:

"Tom, did it ever occur to you that developers might favor difficult cart-ball sites?  My guess is that most never give a first thought to finding a suitable site for walkable golf. "

Yes, that thought did occur to me.  And it's possible some might look at it that way, especially regarding courses associated with housing developments.  That being said, I am pretty darn familiar with the area here, and I just don't see many sites suitable for walkable golf that are available for development PERIOD.  So we get what we get.

TH

[THuckaby2]

PS - I've kept the hair shirt on.  Jeez, two days in a row and it is getting rather itchy.  I'll be a good boy today, and then maybe tomorrow comfort will be mine!

 

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()