Seven Tee boxes?

[Jud_T]

Was just looking at the scorecard for Cog Hill #4 post Dr. Jones reno.  They have six tees, as well as a combo! :

Black 7554
Gold 7144
Blue 6750
Blue/White 6564
White 6382
Green 6033
Forward 5441

Is this what we've come to? I guess so..........

[A.G._Crockett]

It appears to be six, with a combo blue/white listed also.

I've got to say that despite many attempts in all the years that I've been visiting GCA.com, I have never been able to grasp what is wrong or undesirable with multiple tee boxes, even as many as 6.  It's always just looked like a way for more golfers to have more fun to me.  What am I missing?

[Jud_T]

Well,

for one thing the weekend rate is $155.  I'm guessing a portion of that is to build and maintain an extraneous 54 tee boxes and surrounds.....

[Bill Seitz]

The rate was $138 before the renovation when they only listed three or four tee boxes.  It went up to $150 when the renovation was completed, and up another $5 this year.  I don't think the tee boxes have anything to do with the greens fee.  He charges what he thinks he can get.  The last two years on given Sunday mornings around 8:00, I haven't seen too many open tee times. 

Though I'd bet if he went to the other extreme and reduced the course to one tee box he wouldn't be getting $155 for a round, but that would have nothing to do with maintenance costs. 

[Jeff_Brauer]

Was just looking at the scorecard for Cog Hill #4 post Dr. Jones reno.  They have six tee boxes, as well as a combo! :

Black 7554
Gold 7144
Blue 6750
Blue/White 6564
White 6382
Green 6033
Forward 5441

Is this what we've come to? I guess so..........

Here is the worst part - 6 or 7 tees and the forward two sets are still too long for their target golfer.....while two sets of tees target top golfers, who make up about 3% of play.  The forward tees could be 1000 yards shorter on a tough course, and the current forward tees could be the second set.

[Jud_T]

I'm not really complaining about the greens fee per se.  In fact I'm happy to have a high end daily fee option.  Just not sure why you need so many tees.  Does the pro tee really need to be available at all times? I guess if you're trying to make the course playable for everybody from Tiger to the hacker this is what you get....

[Dale_McCallon]

Dumb Question?  What costs more to maintain tee boxes or greens?

This site seems to abhor multiple tee boxes and gasp! runway tees, but Ilve never seen any criticisms of expansive greens.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Greens cost more than tees.  And to a certain degree, more tees are less expensive to maintain because they help spread wear, but there is a crossover point.  With more actual tees, you end up building more than you really need for maintenance reasons, so they end up costing you a little more.

Many courses that have built 7600 yard tees don't maintain them daily to save money.  Given they are probably only for the tournament, they may not maintain them at all until really needed.  Even if some hotshots come out to Cog Hill, I suspect that they would be happy playing at "only" 7144 yards.......

[A.G._Crockett]

I have played a number of places where the scorecard listed a set of tees well in excess of 7000, but there were no tee markers out at the tips, most recently the TPC Scottsdale this past Tuesday. 

Jeff Brauer's criticism of THESE tees makes sense to me; the forward tees should be 4500 or so, and there isn't much need for tees above 7200 unless you are going to host a pretty impressive tournament.  And I guess I see a little validity in the maintenance cost issue as well. 

But still, I can't really see the problem with 5 or more sets of tees.  It just seems like options are good things in the game of golf, especially right now.  The more players that you can attract to the game, the better.

So, here's my ideal set:
1. 7000+
2. 6500  (with a mix of 1. and 2. playing at around 6700 also listed on the card)
3. 6000  (with a mix of 2. and 3. playing at around 6300 also listed on the card)
4. 5500
5. 4500

I'm currently a member at a course that has this basic setup, and I think it is ideal.  The mixed tees are particularly helpful, IMO.

[Tim_Cronin]

The more tee boxes the better, I say, especially on a course like Dubs, where people from 15 to 85 play. Makes complete sense.

[Bill_McBride]

At Pensacola CC we now have black at 7,000; black blue (a mixture) at 6,800; blue at 6,500; white at 6,100; gold at 5.700;l and red at 5,100,  Everybody seems to be happy.

The blue blacks are 13 tips and 5 blues where the tips are way back there - 445, 455, 245, 435, 459.  Makes for a more enjoyable round for the non flat bellies!

[PThomas]

Was just looking at the scorecard for Cog Hill #4 post Dr. Jones reno.  They have six tee boxes, as well as a combo! :

Black 7554
Gold 7144
Blue 6750
Blue/White 6564
White 6382
Green 6033
Forward 5441

Is this what we've come to? I guess so..........

Here is the worst part - 6 or 7 tees and the forward two sets are still too long for their target golfer.....while two sets of tees target top golfers, who make up about 3% of play.  The forward tees could be 1000 yards shorter on a tough course, and the current forward tees could be the second set.

exactly right Jeff...why isnt there a set at 4500 or so?

[jeffwarne]

Was just looking at the scorecard for Cog Hill #4 post Dr. Jones reno.  They have six tee boxes, as well as a combo! :

Black 7554
Gold 7144
Blue 6750
Blue/White 6564
White 6382
Green 6033
Forward 5441

Is this what we've come to? I guess so..........

Here is the worst part - 6 or 7 tees and the forward two sets are still too long for their target golfer.....while two sets of tees target top golfers, who make up about 3% of play.  The forward tees could be 1000 yards shorter on a tough course, and the current forward tees could be the second set.

exactly right Jeff...why isnt there a set at 4500 or so?

Simple solution.
Just put a set on the fringe of every green

Serious question.
Would golfers play the appropriate tees more often if they were charged by the yard.
i.e someone playing from the 6000 yard tees pays 75% of someone playing from the 8000 yard tees

[Jud_T]

Serious question.
Would golfers play the appropriate tees more often if they were charged by the yard.
i.e someone playing from the 6000 yard tees pays 75% of someone playing from the 8000 yard tees

Yeah,  and the solution to the health care problem is to charge by the pound!  Both are interesting points, but too politically charged to ever gain traction....

[A.G._Crockett]

A very serious question:

By "appropriate tees", what do we mean?  It can't be a matter of pace of play, surely.  And since most people on a golf course at any given moment couldn't achieve a score of par or better for a round even if the tees were at 5000, then what IS "appropriate"?

Does appropriate mean "competitive" with other players?  Does it mean "able to reach most greens in regulation"?  Does it mean "fun" for that player?

Can this be quantified?  And, if not, should we worry about it?

[Neil_Crafter]

Just because they advertise 6 or so lengths for their course, doesn't mean they have six tees on every hole. On a larger tee you might have a white mark at the rear and a green one towards the front. Not saying they do mind you but it doesn't automatically mean a separate tee pad for each of those lengths.

[Jason McNamara]

I wonder if the multiple boxes actually do help pace of play.  If you present more options, you reduce the amount by which an average golfer bites off more than he can chew.  If you've got tee boxes at 6900 and 6300, I bet there's a good number of 6600 players who move back rather than up.  Given a very difficult course, better to offer golfers 6550 so they don't play 6750.  And before you say it's only 10 yards a hole, (a) it's not necessarily distributed thus, and (b) even if it were, it only takes one forced carry not cleared to start bogging things down.

(This is more of a general observation, as I have not played CH.)

Edit:  And here's hoping they hide the 7500 markers so that no one tends to play them, except (say) the college kids who know where to look.

[Bill Seitz]

Dumb Question?  What costs more to maintain tee boxes or greens?

This site seems to abhor multiple tee boxes and gasp! runway tees, but Ilve never seen any criticisms of expansive greens.

The new tee boxes are dead squares, so they can't be easy to mow properly. Runway tees, like at Point O Woods, would probably be easier to maintain.

Funny that you mention expansive greens, as Jemsek's other great Chicagoland course, Pine Meadow, has absolutely enormous greens.  Probably the largest I've ever played. 

I wouldn't mind fewer actual tee boxes, but more rated lengths.  They're doing it at Dubs now, and they do it at Lost Dunes.  Hawktree in Bismarck ND was the first place I ever saw hybrid tees on the card.  There's a great course just Northwest of Indianapolis called the Trophy Club that has a set of tees at 6,500 yards, and a set at 7,200 yards (or at least, that's what they had when I played it).  There's no reason not to have an interim set, and it could have been done with a hybrid set on the card.  If this is a trend, it's one I like.

[Steve Strasheim]

This is a subject that interests me a great deal. Since I started playing rounds with my 9 year old son, I pay attention to the forward tees these days. Personally, I see no need for more than 4 sets of tees on most courses. A forward, a tips and two in the middle. There has typically been little difference between the fifth, six and seventh sets that I have been exposed to. I played yesterday and the difference between the blues and whites was typically a few yards with no change in angles. or hazards. The course also had red, green. brown and gold tees.

There must be ranking/handicapping issues involved that I don't fully understand, because it doesn't make a lot of common sense in my opinion.

[Jud_T]

I agree that mixed tees (blue/White etc.) are a very good solution...4 tees and a couple of blends should cover all possible players from 5000 to 7000

[TEPaul]

This post is only intended to be a minor point of order, or more specifically a point of terminology order.

Let me preface:

I have never gotten or sent text messages on my cell phone until the last two weeks and now I have gotten two---both from Ron Prichard.

On the second and latest he asked me to put up a post regarding terminology on this thread.

Let me preface for a second time by mentioning that I have known and communicated with a lot of architects over the last fifteen years or so and of all of them, and throughout that time, I have always felt that Ron Prichard probably had the most interest as well as the finest sense of the history of golf and golf architecture of all of them. It seems to me he had it before it became quite popular in this perhaps twenty year renaissance that as been a dedicated part of golf and architecture during that time.

SO, he asked me to remind this thread----hold on, allow me to check this cell phone test message and arrow down-----


Ron says there are no longer such things as "tee boxes," and that that terminology was part of golf a long time ago that described teeing areas that were sometimes on legs and had actual boxes of sand that were used to tee balls on (apparently before wooden tees). What we have today are tees and tee markers.

Ron also reminds that we do not have a term in golf known as "green complexes." What we have is the "green" that is the whole of the golf course----eg hence a "greenkeeper." Therefore what he asked me to convey was that in his opinion (historically) what we have are putting surfaces or putting areas on that "green." Don't forget, it was not all that long ago that "putting greens" were defined in the Rules as that area within twenty yards of the pin sans bunkers and such. So in actual practice this was the only Rules distinction between approaches for instance and the putting surface or putting area (that involved such ramifications as the handling and hitting of the flagstick (not pin ).

Ron also says he is not a fan of some of these modern terms such as "shot values" which seems to be an opinon shared by the likes of Tom Doak and perhaps others. Apparently Ron feels this is an unnecessary and ancillary add-on to what should just be considered "golf" and golf shots on golf holes.

Again, Ron Prichard has a most interesting (read "pure") sense of the history of golf and architecture and apparently its terminology.

On a side note----if any of you have never heard Ron speak publicly on the subject of golf and architecture I encourage you to make a point of doing it if you hear he may be speaking somewhere. He may be speaking at one of the get-togethers (The Shreiner get-together) during the ATT Aronomink Tournament in Philadelphia during the July 4th week. Try to make it! I plan on being there as well and don't for a minute think I won't egg him on in this particular vein!  

 

[Jud_T]

TEP,

Some of Ron's restoration work that I have seen has been very eye-opening.  His work at Skokie Country Club in particular is worth seeing in person (also worth rereading Ran's course review for those who haven't).  I will defer to his judgement on these matters....

[Mark Smolens]

During a tour of the renovations at Dubsdread after its completion, Frank Jemsek told me that he was initially concerned about the look of the multiple tee boxes at Rees Jones was installing, but after completion he had changed his mind. He and his super had no concerns about additional maintenance costs, and he really likes the way it looks (as do I).

Played Dubs on Sat. of Memorial Day weekend with the golf coach from Brown and a young kid who can play. The kid played it all the way back, made two mistakes with the driver and shot 78 (equalling the course rating). We played the gold tees, which were way too tough for us.

However, there should NOT be a set of tees measuring 4500 yards on a golf course like Dubsdread. If you want to bring a beginning golfer to the course, there are two other courses -- of the four on site -- that you should do so. Not only would your junior/senior/not very good woman player have a difficult time, but the fee is $155. Most of the greens require the player to approach over a bunker. A player like my mother -- who I love to play golf with, just not at a course like Dubs -- would spend the day trying to get balls out of deep greenside bunkers. Not fun for them. . . or the group(s) playing behind them.

[Jud_T]

Mark,

I played the course yesterday.  Although there's a certain similarity now to many of the raised greens, I think the renovations in general are an improvement.  There's a surprising amount of movement in some of the greens and just clearing some of the overhanging trees out has been a big improvement (i.e. #8).  And yes,  there are a lot of tees!

[Tim Nugent]

...However, there should NOT be a set of tees measuring 4500 yards on a golf course like Dubsdread. If you want to bring a beginning golfer to the course, there are two other courses -- of the four on site -- that you should do so. Not only would your junior/senior/not very good woman player have a difficult time, but the fee is $155. Most of the greens require the player to approach over a bunker. A player like my mother -- who I love to play golf with, just not at a course like Dubs -- would spend the day trying to get balls out of deep greenside bunkers. Not fun for them. . . or the group(s) playing behind them.

I would have to concurr with this.  Cog Hill is a multi-course facility and has courses that range from straight-forward to Dubs. (I tend to favor #3).  Jemsek is very in-tune with what the customer wants and strives to give it to him.  But, along with playability comes speed of play and those shelling out $155 aren't too keen on little Johnny bunting it around just because Dad can afford it.  Let's face it, not all courses can or should strive to be all things to all people.  Golfers should Read the tees.  On Dubs, they say "if you can't play from here, this is not a course for you, please try one of our other offerings".