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.


Jeb Bearer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Balanced Nines
« on: February 25, 2013, 07:26:18 PM »
How important are balanced nines (in terms of yardage and/or par) if at all?
What are some examples of courses with grossly unbalanced nines? How does this phenomenon affect the design of these courses?

My personal opinion is that it doesn't matter so long as the course maintains a good flow and give/take, but I'd like to hear everyone's thoughts.

My apologies if this has been discussed before, maybe someone who can figure out the search function could point me to some old threads?

David_Elvins

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Balanced Nines
« Reply #1 on: February 25, 2013, 07:35:59 PM »
Its more important on flat sites.
Ask not what GolfClubAtlas can do for you; ask what you can do for GolfClubAtlas.

Alex Miller

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Balanced Nines
« Reply #2 on: February 25, 2013, 07:40:06 PM »
It's most important with returning 9's.

John Kirk

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Balanced Nines
« Reply #3 on: February 25, 2013, 09:10:14 PM »
Hi Jeb,

A well known example is Pacific Dunes, which goes:

4-4-5 4-3-4 4-4-4 36
3-3-5 4-3-5 4-3-5 35

In this case, the unbalanced nines work very well.

Tyler Kearns

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Balanced Nines
« Reply #4 on: February 25, 2013, 11:57:39 PM »
Isn't it the objective of a golf course architect to find/create the best 18 holes the land/budget allows?

It is certainly easier to balance nines in terms of par and yardage on flat sites where the land does not possess any constraints to achieving it.  I guess the only reason I can understand the need to balance nines would be if it took much longer to play one nine versus the other.  This would be an issue for maximizing early morning weekend tee times when both nines are used to start.  Barring that, take what the land offers and provide the best eighteen holes possible.  It would seem a shame to eat up a healthy chunk of the budget re-working the land to achieve a 36-36 par or limit the yardage discrepancy between nines.

TK

Frank Pont

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Balanced Nines
« Reply #5 on: February 26, 2013, 01:37:22 AM »
I have both made nines more and less "balanced". As far as I am concerned its all about the best routing for the property, not about balance per se.

There arguments for and against balance. The advantage of unbalanced is that you get to play two different loops. Eg my original home course Eindhoven is 36 and 36, but the front nine is 250 yards shorter. It is played much more by the older members.

Another example is Hoge Kleij where we went from 36 and 36 to 35 and 37, but now the routing is more varied and the height differences are better distributed over the two nines. There was a lot of resistance at the start, but now two years in there is general agreement the changed routing works better

Jud_T

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Balanced Nines
« Reply #6 on: February 26, 2013, 11:09:25 AM »
The front nine at Kingsley is 332 yards shorter than the back (or up to 379 yards shorter depending on which back tee is in play that day on #'s 1 & 9).  Given the choice I prefer unbalanced 9's.  As mentioned it allows for a quicker 9-hole loop and an easier side, at least distance-wise, for women, children and old folks.  It also adds variety to the round for members who'll need it after hundreds of rounds on the same track.  Frankly, I can't see any good reason to strive for symmetry of 9's.  If that's what the property constraints or client dictates so be it, but otherwise I see no rational design reason for it.  There are far too many par 72 courses of relatively equal length sides and god forbid you don't have 4 par 3's and 4 par 5's.  Where exactly was that written in scripture anyway?
« Last Edit: February 26, 2013, 11:16:27 AM by Jud Tigerman »
Golf is a game. We play it. Somewhere along the way we took the fun out of it and charged a premium to be punished.- - Ron Sirak

Ally Mcintosh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Balanced Nines
« Reply #7 on: February 26, 2013, 02:13:10 PM »
For me, it matters only if you have one nine full of short par-4's and the other nine full of long 4's...

Aside from that (and perhaps speed of play if nines are returning and groups are getting started from both), it is irrelevant...

The course having a nice flow overrides everything...

Howard Riefs

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Balanced Nines
« Reply #8 on: February 26, 2013, 06:11:15 PM »
On the Steamsong threads, much has been discussed that the Red Course's back nine is significantly longer (350+ yards) than the front:

Green tees (tips):
   Front:      3387
   Back:        3761
                    374 yards difference

Black tees:
   Front:      3073
   Back:        3511
                    438 yards difference

http://www.streamsongresort.com/images/pdf/golf-scorecard-sctreamsong-red.pdf


I have yet to play the course, so can't comment on how the imbalance affects how it plays.
"Golf combines two favorite American pastimes: Taking long walks and hitting things with a stick."  ~P.J. O'Rourke