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.


Brian Phillips

  • Karma: +0/-0
Why 18 holes?
« on: November 16, 2010, 08:47:43 AM »
Our very intelligent Golf Course Architect Edwin Roald from the EIGCA has written a very interesting article for the website where he discusses the reasoning behind not having 18 holes.

http://www.eigca.org/Article/EIGCA17418.ink

I am a great fan of this especially in this day and age of less and less time available being allowed to individuals to just leave their family and go off and play golf for 5 hours.  The pressure on the modern man or woman to spend more time with the family is increasing and this gives less time to activities such as golf.

Edwin also has his own website where he discusses the subject even deeper.

http://www.why18holes.com/

Swedish golf online also has an opinion.

http://www.swedishgolfonline.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=141&Itemid=590

I love the idea of 12 holes and have discussed it for years with many of my fellow architects and many are in agreement but what are your opinions as traveling golfers?

« Last Edit: November 16, 2010, 08:49:39 AM by Brian Phillips »
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

Phil_the_Author

Re: Why 18 holes?
« Reply #1 on: November 16, 2010, 08:53:38 AM »
Brian,

It's actually a far older idea than most would think as Tilly's Jackson Heights Golf Club had but 12 holes back in the 1930's. Of course iot originally had 18 with 6 being lost to housing, but the 12 worked well and satisfied a major local need for a number of years...

Brian Phillips

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Why 18 holes?
« Reply #2 on: November 16, 2010, 08:58:25 AM »
Philip,

I know it is not an old idea Prestwick was a 12 hole course but is it time to go back to it?
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

Jon Wiggett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Why 18 holes?
« Reply #3 on: November 16, 2010, 09:00:01 AM »
Leith Links with 5 holes

Adam Lawrence

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Why 18 holes?
« Reply #4 on: November 16, 2010, 09:42:56 AM »
I'm just not totally convinced that the solution to golf's problems is to degrade the product. Flexibility is important, and it's clearly a good idea to design in shorter loops wherever possible, but it seems to me that if the issue is the time taken to play then we need courses that can be played more quickly while still delivering a full experience to the customer.

I'll make an analogy. A few years ago, in a different life, I did some work with a large food manufacturing company. They and their competitors were under constant pressure from their supermarket clients to engineer cost out of their products. The competitors went down that route, and did little bits of value engineering like slightly reducing the amount of filling in sandwiches, to meet the supermarkets' demand for a lower price. But the firm with whom I was working took a different approach. They said 'We are not going to reduce the quality of our products. Instead, we will keep the price the same, but we will continually increase the amount of filling, improve the quality of ingredients, etc etc'. And guess who is the most successful?

I believe that discounting is very rarely a long term successful business strategy. There will always be someone who comes along cheaper than you. Focusing on quality, imo, is a better strategy. In golf, to me, this means not trying to convince golfers that a shorter experience is what they really want. It means finding a way to allow them to experience the full product in a timescale that is acceptable to them. It means making golf a half day experience, not a whole one. Which means 3hr - 3hr 30 rounds. The challenge for the golf industry is to find ways of getting to that goal.
Adam Lawrence

Editor, Golf Course Architecture
www.golfcoursearchitecture.net

Principal, Oxford Golf Consulting
www.oxfordgolfconsulting.com

Author, 'More Enduring Than Brass: a biography of Harry Colt' (forthcoming).

Short words are best, and the old words, when short, are the best of all.

Melvyn Morrow

Re: Why 18 holes?
« Reply #5 on: November 16, 2010, 09:49:30 AM »
The Game is Fine, the courses are fine. It’s the bloody way we play the modern game that stinks. Face the facts and stop thinking the Grass is Greener on other types of Courses,  Golf is what YOU make of it - the fault if any rest with you and your game.
 
AAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH,  Do you ever stop and think let alone wonder at times why I keep asking what game are you playing, clearly you do not know either.

5 hours for a round, come on Guys that is just no acceptable, me thinks that if it does not improve then each course should introduce an induction course before player Tee off. Not happy do something do not just moan but leave our courses alone, look to the ball clubs technology management and of course your game first.

Melvyn


Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Why 18 holes?
« Reply #6 on: November 16, 2010, 10:49:25 AM »
Brian,

Get to my age and the idea of a 12 hole course will appeal more and more.  Many seniors play 18 as long as they can, and when that gets tiresome, they quit at 12, then 9, then 6 then 3.  That suggests that 18 is hard to dump, but any new course that can route back near the clubhouse at least one extra time per nine would be very popular.
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Why 18 holes?
« Reply #7 on: November 16, 2010, 10:54:01 AM »
Of course, much of the concept of less than 18 depends on the competition in the area.  Shiskine does well because its the king of Arran, one of the most beautiful sites in the world for golf and it is fairly cheap.  I do think the concept of 3 lops of six holes could work more generally as a starting point for less than 18 holes because obviously one can have 18 if he wishes.  However, while in theory I have no issue with less than 18 holes I think its a hard sell now.  The course would have to be something very special OR reduced from 18 holes to leave the best of the course (thats what I think The Glen in N Berwick should do).  Then again, if the site is special tehre must be a compelling reason NOT to build 18 holes.  The biggest reason for that is usually down to availability of land land money, but with money there is often a plan for 18 eventually.  Bottom line, pick your place and the concept can work, but in a competitive market the less than 18 holer is starting in a hole which will be difficult to climb out of.  As Adam points out, to me, other than 3 loops of 6 holes, the first place to start is by building shorter, quicker to walk 18 holers.  To me, this means we have to start looking much more seriously at sub par 70, 6000ish yard courses.  

Ciao
« Last Edit: November 16, 2010, 11:08:26 AM by Sean Arble »
New plays planned for 2024: Nothing

Ally Mcintosh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Why 18 holes?
« Reply #8 on: November 16, 2010, 11:47:20 AM »
Every year, I take 16 of my old friends on a golfing weekend to some classic courses around GB&I... It's a Ryder Cup style shindig... They are only very casual golfers and go more for the cameraderie and competition.

Almost to a man, they reckon that 18 holes is too many and that 14 is about right...

Niall C

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Why 18 holes?
« Reply #9 on: November 16, 2010, 02:48:41 PM »
Back in the 1930's Harry Colt thought of another approach and that was to have more short holes. In other words take out the par 5's and have a couple more par 3's. Voila, decreased mileage and decreased time on the course.

Niall

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back