Between Zero and Five Percent

[Tim_Weiman]

I played a new golf course in Cleveland last week (Boulder Creek) and didn’t see any group walking other than the guys I played with. When I got back to the pro shop I asked two employees how many people walked:

1st Answer: “Zero”
2nd Answer: “No, it’s between zero and five percent”

The golf course has only one severe uphill walk (13 green to 14 tee), though there are several green to tee walks (2/3, 10/11, 12/13, 16/17) of fifty yards or more.

How much is modern architecture to blame for the decline in walking?

[JLahrman]

Modern architecture is part of it, but not all.  At older, easy to walk public courses most people ride.  Even at old private courses, young members ride rather than take caddies.

Golfers today are anchored to carts.  After you play a couple times at cart-mandatory places, walking seems like more work when you have the choice.  Plus there are many players who view the game as a social excursion.

[Mike Hendren]

Tim,

You answered your own question:  "zero to five percent."

I don't think it's the architecture at all, though the routing and topo of some courses are indeed unwalkable.  

Cartball is simply a popular game in America because a) it enhances the financial viability of public and private courses, b) people can afford to ride, c) people are lazy, d) they didn't grow up walking and carrying like I did, and e) let's be honest, driving a golf cart is fun, particularly for NASCAR fanatics.

I can't see laying the blame at the feet of the modern architects.  I suspect few people walk Ross' Hill Course at French Lick, Flynn's Lower Cascades Course at The Homestead or Langford's Gatlinburg Country Club, just to name a few older courses.  

Regards,

Mike

[ChasLawler]

There's no question modern architecture and the advent of real estate development courses have contributed to the decline in walking. Some is due in part to many clubs' policies that require walking, or CCFAD's that include the cost of a cart in the green fee, and offer little to no discount for walking. Unfortunately there aren't many of us out there who will pay for the cart and not use it.

Mainly though IMO, it's just due to the modern man's tendancy to be lazy. In this world of creature comforts, people just don't asociate golf with walking anymore. In fact most golfers these days consider riding in a cart to be a fundamental part of the game, and scoff at the idea of carrying their own bag. Very sad.

[JLahrman]

Mike:  I took a cart at French Lick because they told me that it is too hilly for most to walk.  But when I played it, I didn't think it would be that bad to walk at all.  Especially at only 6600 yards or so, and with not too many places to lose balls.  If I go back I'll be walking.  Of course, I grew up walking and caddying on fairly hilly courses in the Cincinnati area so maybe it would bother others more than me.

Carts are here to stay though.  They just make too much money for the courses.  If you get rid of them we'll all be paying the difference through our greens fees.  So while I like to see people walking, I don't mind if I'm the only one while the rest of the course rides.

[Matt Dupre]

Tim,

I may have seen you as I was driving by on the Ohio Turnpike on the way back to Philly from Michigan  .  At 80 mph, the holes I could see looked interesting and there certainly doesn't seem to be any major elevation changes in that area.

As for carts, it's getting ridiculous but I don't blame it on modern architecture (I assume you're focusing on long green to tee treks).  Even older courses with great flow rely too much on carts, primarily for the revenue.  Most players (especially the infrequent or newer ones) don't know any better.

My wife and I played Thousand Oaks outside of Grand Rapids, a decent Rees Jones (I realize that may be heresy, but he had some great property and elevations to work with) and the guy in the pro shop and the starter both almost fainted when we said we would walk (and carry).  The norm seems to be everyone taking a cart....plus a cooler.  No thanks  

[david h. carroll]

Couldn't one argue that the invention of carts brought about the designers' ability to create huge distances between greens and tees?

[david h. carroll]

I always walk Cascades....it's breathtaking--visually and physically!!

[ChasLawler]

dcarrol - you're exactly right. The cart has given the architect and the developer the flexibilty to spread courses out as much as they want.

And JAL - I'd gladly tack on an extra $20 per round if carts were to be banned entirely on golf courses. As I said before, at most public courses, you're paying for the cart anyway regardless of whether you use it - it's already in the greens fee.

[david h. carroll]

speaking of the cart issue, I could not believe the number of times carts were let out on my home course during the extremely wet spring in the mid atlantic all for the sake of revenue!!  They shredded it.

[Tim_Weiman]

Mike Hendren:

It is difficult to argue with the points you have made. Down at my local muni I've noticed young people take carts far more than older fellows. Hell, when I was growing up, I was just happy to have a few Titleist golf balls in my bag and couldn't even imagine paying for a cart.

Truthfully, I don't know how much architecture is to blame. Maybe very little. But, I do wonder if there is a kind of spill over effect whereby people get conditioned to ride on resort type courses with long green to tee walks and then just stick with it on courses that really are pretty easy to walk. The muni I mentioned is damn near dead flat with only a few uphill walks to greens and almost every tee very close to the previous green.

[Tim_Weiman]

Cabell:

Shortly after Poppy Hills opened (mid to late 80's I think), I went with some guys from Cleveland to play the Monterey courses. At Poppy Hills we were told we had to take a cart. When we offered to pay for the cart but still walk they said we had to be a member of the Northern California Golf Association to walk. So, we asked how much it cost to join the Association. At that point they said okay we could walk and do so without paying anything extra.

[ian]

Tim,
The modern architect has less to blame than the general lazyness in society. I can show you a couple of nightmare walks from the golden age, so modern architecture isn't to blame. As you pointed out, people are forced to ride too often too, and that doesn't help.

By the way loved your Poppy story.

As a thought, you can always leave the cart if it isn't running At least I thought it wasn't running.

[ChasLawler]

Ian,

I did exactly that at the TPC at Sawgrass this spring. The damn thing broke down on the 2nd tee...off the cart path, parked discreetly in the trees.

[david h. carroll]

Of course, I never learned to drive.....

[A_Clay_Man]

Blaming the archie isn't neccasarily the way to go. Sure, if he suggests that he built the place so cart revenue could be maximized, then give it to him with both barrels.

But it's the owner who likely knows enough to know that perpetual profit machines are a good thing, for him.

let's see... 35 million divided by $20,,,, Boy thats a lot of carts! Oh let's charge $40... OK   "How much is that apiece"

[J_McKenzie]

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the issue of "time".  A lot of people ride in carts because (1) it's quicker if you have a limited amount of time to play, assuming the course isn't crowed, (2) you can get in more holes vs. walking if time isn't limited, again assuming the course isn't crowded, and (3) if the course is crowded, a cart gives you somewhere to sit and carry "beverages" to make the slow play a little more bearable.  

[Mike Hendren]

J Mc,

Count me among those who do not believe cartball is faster.  As an anti-JakaBean I play a lot of solo golf late in the day.  Walking and carrying requires 2:55 give or take five minutes.  Riding might save me fifteen minutes.

Regards,

Mike

[JLahrman]

Cart golf is absolutely the slowest way to play when the ol' 90 degree rule is in effect.  It is also slower if you have people who do not know what they are doing.

[billb]

It seems modern real estate developers are much more to blame than modern architects.
I personally avoid playing at the housing developments that have a golf course running through the middle.
Not only are carts usually required, but the green fees are usually high and the courses usually stink.  
Give me a decent muni with a walking foursome anyday.
Bill

[david h. carroll]

Bill--I must say your comments are wrong as I believe places such as Long Cove were residential developments first and golf second.

[Tim_Weiman]

dcarroll:

I doubt Long Cove is the kind of residential development Bill Brownrigg had in mind. In fact, I wish they all could be so nice - both to play and to walk.

[david h. carroll]

Tim--I got that.....just thought it needed to be stated to refute his glossed over generality.

[david h. carroll]

Tim---and BTW, I never liked the walk between 11 and 12!!

[Tim_Weiman]

dcarroll:

Actually, I think there were many courses built in the classic era to support real estate development. Here in Cleveland William Flynn's The Country Club is an example. Things were just done in such a classy way back then that we don't even think of such courses a part of real estate development.