Matt,
It sounds like RL is certainly worth a visit.
I am not debating that golfers SHOULD play the appropriate tees - but based on my experiences at challenging courses, most golfers do not.
What I am suggesting is that, architects need to keep in mind while designing their course the fact that many golfers will NOT play the appropriate tees but probably one or even two back. The hubris that many golfers have, can severely hurt their ability to enjoy a challenging course.
While some may say - "too bad for them" or "who cares" - the ownership of the course and architect should be cogniscent of this fact, because an unhappy golfer will not return for another round (which is something that I constantly read about with Tetherow) or consider joining a club/buying a property.
If the fairways are fairly wide then the penalty for these golfers is long irons into the greens, if the course is going to be narrow or very target specific (ie - distance and ball placement important on most tee shots) then the outcome is lost balls and a lot of whining about how unfair the course is.
To improve the average golfer's enjoyment of their course, again IMO, they should consider making landing corridors wider for these golfers who, while playing the wrong tees, will also be passing judgement on the course.
I firmly believe that a talented architect can create a demanding course for the low handicapper while still stroking the ego of the average golfer (up to a certain reasonable point) by providing some love to Average Joe off the tee, while making him work for his par/bogey around the greens.
I totally understand that not everyone will agree with this somewhat "hand holding" sentiment, but I believe the average score of people who golf is somewhere around 102-105 and most people who consider themselves "golfers" shoot somewhere in the 90s.
Joel - That is a good call out - always unfortunate when the "great" courses in any area are mostly private.