Practice area versus a par 3 course

[Sandy Smith]

What do you think is a better use of space at a golf club, a incredible short game area or challenging 9 hole par three course?
Please give examples if you can.

[V. Kmetz]

SS

It's got to be the latter...the par 3 course.

Because even if few play it, it de facto evolves into the short game area that you were contemplating.

Plus:

a. if it truly is a nice par 3 course, that club gains a cache of usage that not many do.
b. it becomes an asset to accommodate children and beginning junior play, perhaps some seniors who can't/don't like tackling the big course.
c. it becomes an asset to the teaching program, and gives the pros the ability to give more "playing" and "short game" lessons (which I think are much more crucial) that don't get hustled around a busy 18.
d. it can be an amusing or time killing activity...as an extended warm up prior to a round... if there is a crush on the tee and the group can come back in an hour when it'll be cleaner.. or if a junior is waiting for a ride home.

I'm envisioning a very "wee course" on like 10-16 acres with holes in the 60-110 yard range.

cheers

vk

[Josh Stevens]

short course every time if you have the space (nice if they could throw in one or two tiddly par 4's rather than just all 3's)
Perhaps that is self serving, but I have young kids and the hours I spend out on my club's short course are priceless. We have holes from 130m to 270m and I can zip around there with the tykes in 90 minutes and they love it whereas they would tire of a practice area in about 11 seconds. 
In the current market, giving time poor parents a golfing option is financial gold.

[Tony Ristola]

Why not both if the land is flattish?

Mow the mass of it short, allow for multiple par-3 routings, and have some type of schedule of use?

[Jason Topp]

One club near us used land for a big practice area and a par 3 course.  The practice area gets used.  The par 3 course sits empty.

[Bill Gayne]

It depends on the club but the potential benefits:

The par three course will bring new adult players and juniors into the game and give older seniors a place to play.

It will also differentiate the club in the marketplace for new members.

[Bill_McBride]

Sandy, Columbia-Edgewater has both.  It's a nice layout, with the first and ninth holes of the par 3 course by the short game area. 

[Thomas Dai]

One club near us used land for a big practice area and a par 3 course.  The practice area gets used.  The par 3 course sits empty.

Unfortunately this is my experience too. A shame.

atb

[Patrick_Mucci]

Friars Head has both, but given a choice I prefer a practice area/range because I can select the clubs and shots I want to practice as opposed to having them dictated to me

[Sandy Smith]

Thanks everyone.
I tend to agree with Jason that a practice area might be the better choice.
Columbia Edgewater's is very nice.

[David_Tepper]

The par-3 Cliffs Course at the Olympic Club gets plenty of use, probably more than the short-game practice areas there.

[Rees Milikin]

Why about a six hole par 3 course and a practice area, or some sort of mix of both?

[Paul Gray]

From a golf perspective,  par 3 course everytime. The bean counter in me regrets to suggest you just give 'em a driving range.

[Niall C]

Friars Head has both, but given a choice I prefer a practice area/range because I can select the clubs and shots I want to practice as opposed to having them dictated to me

Patrick

What if they had a variety of tees, or even better what if they didn't even have a tee but had a teeing area where you could pick your own spot to play from. At the end of the day it's not likely that you would be playing in an official comp so why dictate where people play from ?

Niall

[Adrian_Stiff]

It all depends on how much space you have but if you only have a spare 8-10 acres and it is all you got then there is no question at all that a practice area should come first in terms of what most members or visitors would require. A good short game area does not even need an acre and then a par 3 course comes next. Par 3 courses in the UK are generally not used very much the 'membership'. That aside Par 3 courses to a small number of members are very important. I know of one 18 hole par 3 course that is a fantastic business, it does not have any features that GCA would like but it is great for introducing new golfers. Fun par 3 courses do not have enough people to love them because their potential players do not play them in favour of the main full course.

Most people that join a golf club outside of proximity and friend consideration see the golf course itself as the prime reason, the practice area would be next, then the clubhouse is the 3rd consideration.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Friars Head has both, but given a choice I prefer a practice area/range because I can select the clubs and shots I want to practice as opposed to having them dictated to me

Patrick

What if they had a variety of tees, or even better what if they didn't even have a tee but had a teeing area where you could pick your own spot to play from.

Niall,

Then they'd better have significant layers of liability insurance.

I started practicing by stockpiling a shag bag with 120 balls.
120 because it allowed me to divide up my practice routine in sets of 10, 12, 15, 20, 30 or 40 ball units.

When practicing and trying to improve your game, repitition builds consistency, not randomness.

With shag bags having gone the way of the stymie, I still practice in predetermined sets on the range/practice tee.

You can't get that on a par 3 course, and, you have to play the course at pace.
At the range, I can take my time over every shot and hit all of the balls in my set before moving on to the next club.

Typically, a practice set is comprised of:
LWedge (Short)
LWedge (Long)
SWedge
PWedge
8-iron
6-iron
4-iron
2-iron *
LWedge (Long)
LWedge (Short)

* No longer hit 2-iron on the range/practice tee.

I can't get the same benefit from playing a par 3 course, especially since my practice putting and practice bunker play is a separate routine.

At the end of the day it's not likely that you would be playing in an official comp so why dictate where people play from ?

To avoid injury and a zillion lawsuits

Niall

[Niall C]

Patrick

You're green ink has gone off colour, are you feeling OK ? Maybe time to see a doctor.

Anyway, to your post. Your original objection was to being dictated what shot or length of shot to hit which I answered (successfully). You then came up with a number of objections that in essence are the reasons why a par 3 course isn't a practice range. All fair points if you want a practice range to start with but I don't think that was the point of the question.

Adrian

Do you think that par 3 courses would be used more if a) they were kept in the same condition as the main course, and b) they consisted of proper golf holes with some design input rather than random areas of mown turf ? I've seen quite a few par 3 courses that have had minimal upkeep and are absolutely featureless, and have never felt the need or want to play any of them. The only one I have played was the par 3 course at Valderamma which was a proper golf course, in good condition and was a blast to play.

Also tend to think that par 3 courses would appeal more to visitors as a bit of an add on to their golf "experience".

Niall

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick

You're green ink has gone off colour, are you feeling OK ? Maybe time to see a doctor.

The green ink is sometimes replaced by blue ink so as to not confuse the morons reading multiple replies.

Anyway, to your post. Your original objection was to being dictated what shot or length of shot to hit which I answered (successfully). You then came up with a number of objections that in essence are the reasons why a par 3 course isn't a practice range.

All fair points if you want a practice range to start with but I don't think that was the point of the question.

Of course it was.
The title of the thread is:  "PRACTICE AREA VERSUS A PAR 3 COURSE"

And the question asked was:  " What do you think is a better use of space at a golf club, a incredible short game area or challenging 9 hole par three course?
Please give examples if you can."

In the short game area, I can work on those aspects of my game that need specific attention.
I can't do that on a par 3 course, a course that will dictate the shots I have to play.
In addition, at the practice area I can hit 100 or more of the shots I need to work on.
At the par 3 course I can only hit one shot, chosen by someone else, from the tee per hole

Adrian

Do you think that par 3 courses would be used more if a) they were kept in the same condition as the main course, and b) they consisted of proper golf holes with some design input rather than random areas of mown turf ? I've seen quite a few par 3 courses that have had minimal upkeep and are absolutely featureless, and have never felt the need or want to play any of them. The only one I have played was the par 3 course at Valderamma which was a proper golf course, in good condition and was a blast to play.

Also tend to think that par 3 courses would appeal more to visitors as a bit of an add on to their golf "experience".

Niall

[Tommy Williamsen]

The biggest drawback of a short course is someone will be on the tee so you have to move to the next tee.  The short game area at Musgrove Mill is exceptional.  Standing in one location you can hit to pins 10, 20, 30, 40 60, and 80 yards.  There are equivalent shots from bunkers and waste area.  If you turn around you can hit anything from wedge to three wood out of bunkers.  In terms of getting the most out of your time a good short game area wins by miles.

[Adrian_Stiff]

Patrick

You're green ink has gone off colour, are you feeling OK ? Maybe time to see a doctor.

Anyway, to your post. Your original objection was to being dictated what shot or length of shot to hit which I answered (successfully). You then came up with a number of objections that in essence are the reasons why a par 3 course isn't a practice range. All fair points if you want a practice range to start with but I don't think that was the point of the question.

Adrian

Do you think that par 3 courses would be used more if a) they were kept in the same condition as the main course, and b) they consisted of proper golf holes with some design input rather than random areas of mown turf ? I've seen quite a few par 3 courses that have had minimal upkeep and are absolutely featureless, and have never felt the need or want to play any of them. The only one I have played was the par 3 course at Valderamma which was a proper golf course, in good condition and was a blast to play.

Also tend to think that par 3 courses would appeal more to visitors as a bit of an add on to their golf "experience".

Niall

Yes I think if par 3 courses were in better condition more would play it and no doubt if it had more interesting holes it would get more play. I don't remember if you saw our par 3 course but it's 9 holes, five are over 100 and the other four are 54, 70, 70 and 76....so lob wedges or sand iron's, our longest can be an 8 iron, many holes have water fronting the green, it is great fun with USGA greens, we use mats on the tees and the whole course does not have 1 hectare of grass. Here are some facts about its usuage. We have 1000 members, 750 have never ever played it, about 50 use it more than 10 times a year, in any year less than 100 members will use it so 90% do not use it. We have an annual tournament which we play each year on the wednesday nearest the longest day, have a barbecue and 4 teams of 10, we play two rounds one individual one better ball...its an absolute blast and every year the same thing gets said... i must play this more...they never do. Visitors love it but probably only 33% include it in their society day. They can choose to have free range balls or play the par 3 and next year they can play the back nine at Augusta on a simulator. The add on makes a great day and it is something other clubs cant offer. I expect the simulator will impact the par 3 course usuage. The main reason why people do not play it is ...Time.......Time is our only enemy.....When the visit the club they want a full game and the younger generation have time budgets.

[Thomas Dai]

Patrick

You're green ink has gone off colour, are you feeling OK ? Maybe time to see a doctor.

Anyway, to your post. Your original objection was to being dictated what shot or length of shot to hit which I answered (successfully). You then came up with a number of objections that in essence are the reasons why a par 3 course isn't a practice range. All fair points if you want a practice range to start with but I don't think that was the point of the question.

Adrian

Do you think that par 3 courses would be used more if a) they were kept in the same condition as the main course, and b) they consisted of proper golf holes with some design input rather than random areas of mown turf ? I've seen quite a few par 3 courses that have had minimal upkeep and are absolutely featureless, and have never felt the need or want to play any of them. The only one I have played was the par 3 course at Valderamma which was a proper golf course, in good condition and was a blast to play.

Also tend to think that par 3 courses would appeal more to visitors as a bit of an add on to their golf "experience".

Niall

Yes I think if par 3 courses were in better condition more would play it and no doubt if it had more interesting holes it would get more play. I don't remember if you saw our par 3 course but it's 9 holes, five are over 100 and the other four are 54, 70, 70 and 76....so lob wedges or sand iron's, our longest can be an 8 iron, many holes have water fronting the green, it is great fun with USGA greens, we use mats on the tees and the whole course does not have 1 hectare of grass. Here are some facts about its usuage. We have 1000 members, 750 have never ever played it, about 50 use it more than 10 times a year, in any year less than 100 members will use it so 90% do not use it. We have an annual tournament which we play each year on the wednesday nearest the longest day, have a barbecue and 4 teams of 10, we play two rounds one individual one better ball...its an absolute blast and every year the same thing gets said... i must play this more...they never do. Visitors love it but probably only 33% include it in their society day. They can choose to have free range balls or play the par 3 and next year they can play the back nine at Augusta on a simulator. The add on makes a great day and it is something other clubs cant offer. I expect the simulator will impact the par 3 course usuage. The main reason why people do not play it is ...Time.......Time is our only enemy.....When the visit the club they want a full game and the younger generation have time budgets.

Adrian,

At which of your locations is this par-3 course?

I'm intrigued as I have a fondness for par-3/short courses.

atb

[Josh Tarble]

For me...I'd vote a fantastic short game complex any day of the week.  Ideally it would be great to have 3 or 4 different green complexes to aim at, all replicating greens, short grass and rough found on the course, giving the player similar conditions to practice.  Definitely a few challenging bunkers and enough area to practice everything out to about 100 yards.

If I would have time for a par3 course, I'd probably just find a few extra minutes and play 9 on the full course.  Anything shorter than that and I'd just hit balls for a bit.

[Dan Boerger]

We just opened a new Short Game Aree at our club this past weekend ... Goal is to simulate virtually any shot from 40 yards in on our course. 

Would I rather have this than a 9 hole par 3 course? I would, but I needs lots of help with the short game!

[Adrian_Stiff]

Thomas - The Players Club is the one i am taking about. Other courses I have designed, The Kendleshire has 6 holes on about 1.5 acres, St Cleres has one. Cumberwell which I did 36 holes are also currently building a 9 hole par 3 course, James Edwards is doing that.

Greys Green has one already and we are upgrading that and at Saltford we are looking at a 9 hole par 3 course. We also have the Portishead project where we are not sure about a 9 hole course or 18 hole par 3 course or maybe we can do both.

In summary they are relatively cheap to build and maintain and can occupy an awkward corner of land perhaps not suitable for full length golf holes. Commercial viabilty and spending too much £$£$£ is a difficult call as its a pretty niche market, though I know of one 18 hole that is a good moneymaker.

[Thomas Dai]

Adrian,

Thanks for this. Another couple of reasons for me to head north Bristol way and further afield too. I just websited your Watergarden course at The Players - course record 22.

I'll be interested to hear how the Portishead project develops.

atb