[Melvyn Morrow]

To spend a day at a normal length course 5,800 to 6,500 yards and have an AM & PM game (36 holes with a lunch break) or play on a super long courses of 7,500yards +.

To start, I must explain I have not, nor do I have, any wish to play a long course. The thought appals me. I have no interest as I get older, to hit the ball with all my might just to traverse distance or prove a point to myself or fellow golfers; Nor am I wanting to create any health problems i.e. hernia, slipped disc, pulled tendon or perhaps bring on a heart attack just for the satisfaction of hitting a long ball – well gone are the days when I needed to say, mine is bigger or longer than yours. I am happy to leave that sort of macho stuff to the ill informed or bruiser type (all muscles and not much between the ears), because ultimately long distance shots are the least skilled golf stroke and is rapidly becoming a Wham, Bam, Thank You Ma’m experience.

 There is another point which Course Owners, Architects and Green Keepers need to remember, and again it relates to health – in that today we are all living longer, with retirement (or early retirement) more older people are on the golf courses these days, therefore a course designer needs to heed this new phenomenon just in case he leaves himself, or the course operator/owner liable for any deaths on the course. My father died on a golf course, aged 62 years, after hitting a long drive and collapsed walking down the fairway towards his ball (a great long shot, I was told by the Caddy but which in the end helped to kill him). This is not the reason why I am against long courses.

My enjoyment from golf, as I have mentioned on many occasions, relates to the challenge, trying to plan a route with my limited skills through to placing my ball as close to the flag for (I hope) an easy putt. To play first thing in the morning either by myself or with friends is just what the doctor ordered (relaxed, de-stressing, getting plenty of fresh air and exercising). Then to rest, assess my/our game, have some lunch, before a second round in the afternoon in which I hope to correct any errors I made in the morning; on a dry day with a modest wind, just perfect.

I allow myself to enjoy the course as it’s not too long, so definitely I  do not need or want a buggy, yet I still feeling good at the end of the first 18 and looking forward to another round later. But stretch that another mile before a break and most of the aging golfers will find it tiring and may not want another round in the afternoon even using the ubiquitous buggy. If you want to live longer burn the buggies, they should only be available for those that really need them to play a round.
 
A long course - I just cannot see how anyone can actually justify them. What actual benefit do they bring to golf?  I see no benefits for player or course, with the exception of the Professionals and a few guys who have the physical ability to hit a long ball. Does it take skill, well, err, not really - just pure brute force – so why increase the course for a handful of big hitters - forgetting for the moment the cost, maintenance and time scale arguments. I see no need to pamper to a very small minority of golfers because their money alone will not keep the course/club going. The moneys come from the pockets of the average golfer – so we should cater for Mr Average, to allow the game to continue and flourish. As for technology re clubs and balls, by returning to a more normal and playable length course you start to reduce the need for high tech aids. After all how many times have I read threads on GCA.com about how someone has enjoyed this or that par 3? For me, the last 150 yard from the hole is where skill comes into play.

Day to day Golf is there for us - the mass silent majority, it’s our game. Yes, we enjoy watching our Heroes but that is not playing golf. I’m talking about the real game of golf or am I really just a lone voice in the wilderness.

What’s your opinion?   

[John Kavanaugh]

I would rather play a 7500 yd course than a 5800 yd one because I always gamble and can not go low no matter how easy the course.  My favorite clubs are my 3 iron and driver.  It is not uncommon for me and my friends to play a course from the tips in the morning and then pure alternate shot in the afternoon.

I also love being a member of a very difficult course because I do not know one member I would classify as a panty waste.

[Mark Chaplin]

Interesting for someone interested in GCA, surely 7500yds gives you zero options....driver + something long.......I'd sooner stick needles in my plums.

Give me a course with a few options, 330yds can be far more challenging that 475yds likewise a short par five can give some interesting options rather than 600yds of slog.

There is a lot of the world which involves going over water to expand ones horizons and education in any field of interest.

[John Kavanaugh]

Interesting for someone interested in GCA, surely 7500yds gives you zero options....driver + something long.......I'd sooner stick needles in my plums.

Give me a course with a few options, 330yds can be far more challenging that 475yds likewise a short par five can give some interesting options rather than 600yds of slog.

There is a lot of the world which involves going over water to expand ones horizons and education in any field of interest.

I hope you are kidding.  There are tons more options from 200 yds when compared to 80 yd pitch.  A 200 yd shot can be a turbo high 5 iron, a stong 4 iron, a cut 3 iron, a punch hybrid, a trapped driver....etc, etc.  Or maybe you play it safe when bogey will give you a win.  An 80 yd pitch is an 80 yd pitch is an 80 yd pitch. 

[Phil Benedict]

I think the notion that all the skill in golf is from 150-yards in - which Melvyn said in the introduction to this thread - is flat out wrong.  Power is part of the game and always has been, just as power is part of baseball, football, basketball and most sports.

I play at a course with two sets of tees (not counting women and seniors).  The back set is about 500 yards longer than the forward set.  I have a strong preference for the back tees because it makes the course way more interesting for me, and I try to play with guys who feel the same way as I do, who are a distinct minority in our club.

As to the original question, 7500 yards is probably too long for me but 6200 yards, for example, will be too short.  If those were the only choices I'm not sure which I would favor.

[RJ_Daley]

Melvyn, perhaps your post contrasted with JK's is indicative of the wide gap that must exist between your tratditional golf as it has come down to you at the cradle and home of golf, and the sport and scene that golf has evolved to here in the States.  

Your post Melvyn demonstrates an approach to the game as a recreational, healthy and traditional activity, where the spirit is leanred from a long lineage of gowfers, who revere the game as an adjunct to community life.

JK on the otherhand seems like a competitive one, still young enough and strong enough to play the power game.  I think  golf is as much to him a test of manhood, status, outlet to gamble and drink, and place to spend his vast roadbuilder wealth on his terms.    Not that there is anything at all wrong with that.  

But, he is the product of a different sporting culture, as are so many golfers on this side of the pond, where golf is socio-economic, status, and not so much about the lifestyle and traditions of healthy recreation that I suspect are your people's heritage.  

The fact that you desire to play twice in a day, and not so much be in a hard and demanding competition so as to pace yourself in order to just enjoy it, says a lot to me.

[Norbert P]

 A very thoughtful post Dick.

As for me, I'd rather play two fun rounds than one frustrating one. 

[John Kavanaugh]

One distubing thing about this type of thread is that elasticity is so vital to graet achitecture.  Every 7500 yd course has a set of short tees but few short courses have a set of 7500 yd tees.  I don't think ones mans preference should dictate what every man must play.

[Norbert P]

  Every 7500 yd course has a set of short tees but few short courses have a set of 7500 yd tees. 

 If any.

[TEPaul]

RJ:

Your post #5 is a good example not just THAT the "Big World" theory exists but WHY it needs to exist.

[Brent Hutto]

For my game courses in the 5,800 to 6,500 yard range are right in the wheelhouse so that answer is easy to give. On the larger question, I highly value courses on which one can have an easy and non-protracted walking round in the morning and another in the afternoon. In fact I would probably rather play a "pretty good" course like that than a "very good" one that requires a half-day-long slog of 5 miles or more.

I think the best of both worlds comes when the terrain and routing allow a layout that can be played at something like 6,400 yards with short walks from green to tee and also offer the option of hiking backward for 40, 50 or even 75 yards to additional tees allowing the bomber full enjoyment of his gifts by playing the course at 7,000 yard or more.

That seems relatively uncommon in the real world, though. Probably because it requires too much flexibility in the routing.

P.S. And by the way, hitting the ball 300 yards in the air requires a huge amount of skill and with sufficient skill can be done with less brute force than one might imagine from just seeing the result. I'm not sure how anyone who has ever played golf could reckon otherwise.

[RJ_Daley]

One distubing thing about this type of thread is that elasticity is so vital to graet achitecture.  Every 7500 yd course has a set of short tees but few short courses have a set of 7500 yd tees.  I don't think ones mans preference should dictate what every man must play.

Of course you are correct JK.   There are also many aging courses here in the States that would fit Melvyn's preferences.  Yet, hardly any new courses are coming on-line here that tip out at under 6500yards.  Sure, they mostly all have up tees, usually if under 6000 yards are called 'ladies tees'.

Yet, so many recreational US golfers have a mindset that playing an old mom and pop run, par 68, or under 6200 yard course is sort of stepping down in class.  And, they feel inhibited to step up to the senior or ladies tees as well.  And, if they are going to pay the larger sums to play big lot, big boy courses here, then by golly they're going to get their money's worth and play it back at 6800 or>.  

I'm not making a blanket statement at all here.  And, those that belong to private older clubs, still seem like many of those golfers are apt to go out and play a fast twilight 9, play shorter tees, and have that recreational experience that is not a 'competition' for skins, pride, score etc.  I just think that the game for health and recreation and community heritage might be more prevalent in Melvyn's part of the world than here.  Of course that is merely an impression of one who hasn't even ever been there.

[JESII]

Melvyn,

I greatly anticipate, and enjoy the days when I go out to play a "comfortable" course with good friends...I also greatly anticipate the opportunity to see 'what I have' in a tournament on a great golf course.

There are courses for everyone, and yes the majority will never NEED the full-on challenge of the back tees of a tournament course but to each his own and taking out the back tees at my course would generate a revolt...

[Sean_A]

Melvyn

Sight unseen I would invariably always choose to play the shorter course.  Though I don't know why it has to be a question of two rounds on a shorter course VS one round on a long course.  If its a choice between these two usually I will say no thanks to either option and probably take the lesser of two evils and play the long course when I am desperate or perhaps curious.  In truth, both options are too much golf.   

I agree with your sentiment, but if folks want to play at a stupid distance - they gotta right baby.  Having said that, after 30 years of golf, I have seen very few players in which their game is sufficiently good enough that the difference between 6700 yards and 7000 yards makes any difference to how they are tested.  Its mainly an ego trip.

Ciao

[JESII]

Sean,

At which length interval would you then select the longer course...site unseen? In other words, when is a course too short to suit your wishes?

[Sean_A]

Sean,

At which length interval would you then select the longer course...site unseen? In other words, when is a course too short to suit your wishes?

Sully

I have learned not to think in terms of too short.  The length in terms of shortness doesn't impact on how I think of the quality of a course.  If its good its good.  I do however have problems with long courses because an imbalanced amount of wooden play is required.  I spose if pushed, I think of a challenging course as one which is rated at its par.  For instance if par is 69 and the rating is 69 I know it will be challenging regardless of the length - which over here would probably be about 6100 yards.  To put this in context I am a 9 capper who can carry the ball about 250 at a push, but often don't hit drives more than 230ish. 

Ciao

[JESII]

Don't give me that crap...you said above that "sight unseen you would always choose the shorter course"...now perhaps that was simply a response to the 7500 versus 6000 yard question, but sight unseen, I'm betting you'd choose 6000 over 4500. No?

[TEPaul]

Sully:

I think you have to always remember to be careful with some of your opinions or responses to what others say on here. I think you have to always remember that you come at golf and architecture and the whole ball of wax on these things from a far more global perspective for a whole variety of reasons than most of the rest of us on here do. I'm pretty sure you both know and appreciate what-all I mean by that.

Nevertheless, I think it makes your own personal opinons on subjects on here some of the most interesting and valuable on here.

It will never happen but it would very much interest me to see how some of the opinions of some of the contributors on here would change if they had any inkling what it's actually like to play golf like you can.

That's all something of a compliment, by the way. You seem to look at golf and architecture not exactly the way most people think good golfers do. You seem to see it through everyone's eyes better than most any other good player does. I really believe a guy like Faldo might top you on that. It would be interesting for the two of you to talk out your opinions for a few hours to see what would come of it.

[JESII]

Tommy,

Don't let my statement "don't give me that crap" to Sean throw you...he knows where I am coming from...and it was not golf related...I asked him a question and he gave me a non-answer so I spelled it out for him. Now he can select A or B.

[Melvyn Morrow]

Very interesting reaction, but why should I be surprised?

I have the misfortune of not being able to play these days due to a lower back problem, but having said that, I have had more than my fair share of golf.

I’ve seen the inner sanctums of many of the early clubs, had the honour to swing my clubs over many of the original courses. I have been humbled but have always played my game with pride and honesty. I have had many disasters, and a few real triumphs. I can remember my first par – a long par 4 – two on the green, just missed a long putt but down in 4. The remainder of the game was just a blur – people thought I had achieved a hole in one - that regrettably has always eluded me, although close on many, many occasions.

I believe we all have the right to an opinion, but regards golf, I do not believe there is a choice – we must play by the rules once we walk onto the course. I understand the different – let’s call it, ‘approach’ to the game used by our North American cousins. I said that I understand but have yet to been convinced that it’s the way I would like to see the game progress – but leave that for another day.

With the above in mind, I would like make the following comments against those posts that I have just read.

JK
So strong enough to play a fun 7,500 yard course in the morning, but have to select alternative shots in the afternoon – what’s wrong, run out of energy hitting those long balls? Sounds more like boys with fast cars – on your comments I expect you would choose nothing less than a Mustang or Thunderbird, against my choice, a Bentley or Ferrari. But don’t worry once you experienced quality you will want that little bit more!

MC
Interesting – keep the faith.

PB
150 yards – half the length of a good drive from the Tee or the last 150 yards to the Flag may require 2-3 to down the ball – more challenge, fun and skill required in the last 150 yards. But you play your game.

RJ
You are probably right – but I don’t have to prove anything to myself. Golf is down to numbers – you play the numbers, by yourself, with friends or in a competition.

Slag
So would I – No matter how challenging the course – I have always tried to enjoy my game.

JK
My opinion is that the long course corrupts the game of golf. Again it’s only my opinion, and regrettable it will not dictate how other play the game. By you post I wonder – as a keen supporter of the long course – if you possess the skills required to play a challenging game on the more normal or shorter course, or have I misunderstood you? If so I am sorry. 

Brent
Bomber -- I like that – but not your PS. In my time I must have been a fair golfer as I would out distance my friends, yet I don’t remember much skill was required. As for playing golf, yes, guilty there - I would say that I have played a few rounds on a few courses.

RJ
Had to answer, but I don’t think our part of the world needs to prove anything to anyone, so we just enjoy our golf.

Jes
‘Comfortable’ Courses. When plying golf I try to do my best but also enjoy the challenge and experience of every game and course.     

[Lloyd_Cole]

Interesting for someone interested in GCA, surely 7500yds gives you zero options....driver + something long.......I'd sooner stick needles in my plums.

Give me a course with a few options, 330yds can be far more challenging that 475yds likewise a short par five can give some interesting options rather than 600yds of slog.

There is a lot of the world which involves going over water to expand ones horizons and education in any field of interest.

I hope you are kidding.  There are tons more options from 200 yds when compared to 80 yd pitch.  A 200 yd shot can be a turbo high 5 iron, a stong 4 iron, a cut 3 iron, a punch hybrid, a trapped driver....etc, etc.  Or maybe you play it safe when bogey will give you a win.  An 80 yd pitch is an 80 yd pitch is an 80 yd pitch. 

Lets see JK,

80 yards-
Maybe that's too long for the putter, but I can putt it with a hybrid
6 iron running shot
Cut choke down 8 iron
3/4 PW will roll 15 feet
Easy SW should stop dead
Hard LW should back up 10 feet

BTW - am I that good? No, but I like to try. And I read that line of MacKenzie's about the uncouth pitch once too often, I guess.

[John Kavanaugh]

Lloyd,

I know that argument but I just played 72 holes at Bandon and every 80 yd shot was basically a 56 deg wedge of some trajectory.  Of course we didn't have much of any wind that mattered and it has been a wet winter.  To be honest a 60 or 40 yd shot would be more interesting but kinda stupid to leave yourself.

[John Kavanaugh]

JK
So strong enough to play a fun 7,500 yard course in the morning, but have to select alternative shots in the afternoon – what’s wrong, run out of energy hitting those long balls? Sounds more like boys with fast cars – on your comments I expect you would choose nothing less than a Mustang or Thunderbird, against my choice, a Bentley or Ferrari. But don’t worry once you experienced quality you will want that little bit more!

JK
My opinion is that the long course corrupts the game of golf. Again it’s only my opinion, and regrettable it will not dictate how other play the game. By you post I wonder – as a keen supporter of the long course – if you possess the skills required to play a challenging game on the more normal or shorter course, or have I misunderstood you? If so I am sorry. 

Melvyn,

I just had the time of my life playing Bandon at very short distances.  Tomorrow will be the first day this year I hit shags with my 12 year old son.  I think I owe it to him to pay the extra money it may require to belong to a club with a set of tees that will not constrict his growth.  I also feel that the golfers of my club and their friends who have worked and been blessed with the talent to strike a golf ball as the best in the world also deserve a chance to play WFO.  I do not see the evil in allowing people the chance to reach their uptmost potential no matter what small financial burden it may place on my car collection.  To me it is selfish to do or wish otherwise.

I have come to the conclusion today that the cost to maintain beautiful blow out bunkers far outweights the cost of an extra 500 yds.  I will always choose elasticity over frivolity

[Sean_A]

Don't give me that crap...you said above that "sight unseen you would always choose the shorter course"...now perhaps that was simply a response to the 7500 versus 6000 yard question, but sight unseen, I'm betting you'd choose 6000 over 4500. No?

Sully

My response you quoted was in fact a direct response to Melvyn's question of either/or. 

In terms od selecting between 4500 & 6000 yards I would probably always choose the 6000 yard course.  Though if I knew the 4500 yard course had a lot of cool elements that I really enjoy, I have no problem playing at that distance.  For example, Painswick is ~4500 yards and if it were in better condition year round I would be down there far more often because so many shots on the course are compelling. 

Ciao

[Melvyn Morrow]

Jk

To each their own.

The parts of the world we each live in give us the right to free speech, freedom of choice and to travel. I just happen to enjoy older links courses that blend with the local landscape. The new Castle course at St Andrews clearly does not – but it’s there as an overspill course for the town - the old story, it is all about money not golf.

I believe there is more skill in controlling your game than just ones ability to hit a long ball. I can’t see the satisfaction of eating up fairways, but I can enjoy that last 180-150 yard from the flag as each shot becomes more critical. The awareness of the bunkers, the nature of the green, the pleasure of seeing the ball edging closer and closer to the hole, that’s what I enjoy, when I play golf, which regrettable I am unable to do at the moment.

Perhaps I’m old fashioned. Maybe too much golf in my veins, but I still think it worth defending and fighting for. I am not a keen supporter of the R&A. Seems they have lost their way; again that’s my opinion.

Golf is an old game. I wish people would stop trying to rush through changes without weighing up the consequences. In the early days there was a need to develop the ball, to keep its form, from not chipping or shattering, to give the golfer a stable ball to play with. Hickory shafted clubs could be made to snap in the hands of a skilled golfer, by just wiggling it side to side through the actions of the wrists, so perhaps there was a reason to strengthen the shafts. Clubs, balls, are now big money, but I don’t see that money making its way down the line to the clubs or more importantly their courses – its big money alright but not being ploughed back into where it is needed

But why keep developing? The modifications to the balls used in football, rugby, etc have not caused major changes to those sports, nor have the playing fields changes over the last one hundred years. Well, enough of that for the time being.

So enjoy your golf, please do encourage your son to have an open mind regards golf and at the first opportunity come over to Scotland and let him see St Andrews. If you have time contact the R&A to see if they will give you and your son a quick tour of their club house (but try and arrange it before you travel). Also do not forget to play some of the 9 hole courses. Try and find time for a trip to the island of South Uist on the Outer Hebrides to play a round at Askernish.

Again each to their own – but also don’t forget how fortunate we all are to have this great website where we can debate our views on all the aspects of golf. I feel honoured to be able to air my thoughts and opinions on GCA.com.  I think we certainly owe a debt of gratitude to Ran.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()