The key to the future of golf...is Women

[Lyne Morrison]

In the interest of informed content, I offer the following response to the discussion relating to women's golf and perceived slow play.

From a course design perspective, course setup plays a significant role in pace of play.

On traditionally laid out courses most men reach par 3's with their tee shot - while the green is frequently out of reach or requires accomplished long wood play for many women.  Where women are required to play two shots to reach a par 3 this takes more time.

Similarly, most average male golfers are able to reach par 4's in regulation. Again, most average women golfers are not. This is primarily due to tee placement dictating the need for additional shot making.

The average or typical female golfer (31 hcp. in Australia) often takes four shots (or more) to reach a par 5 while the average male (19.5 hcp. in Aust.) takes two or three shots. Additional required shots contribute to playing time.

Add to the mix a low trajectory ball flight, the elements, testing forced carries, heavy rough and ball searching, creeks, water and ball retrieval, deep bunkers, hardpan sand, closely guarded greens etc. Such hazards require many women and other slow swing speed golfers to either play defensively and lay-up before hazards, or 'take their medicine'. Both options require additional playing time.

Women's tees were originally an afterthought in course design. This tee was placed at a token distance in front of the men with minimal, arguably nil, understanding of the influence this position would have on play. This antiquated approach to tee positioning continues to influence female golfer participation in contemporary society. Internationally, some clubs have addressed this situation - many have not.

For those clubs looking to embrace a diverse and contemporary market I suggest it is necessary for the golf industry as a whole (including administrators, club managers, boards, committees and golfers in general) to better understand course setup and the impact this has on playability and enjoyment of the game for slower swing speed golfers.

To appropriately address the subject it is not necessary to 'dumb down courses' - this is far too simplistic. Golfers seeking an exact test of play are, and will remain well catered for.

At the same time both genders vary in their approach and attitude toward pace of play. Despite the challenge of long courses, the vast majority of club women golfers I have observed meet pace of play guidelines while adhering to etiquette and the rules of the game.

Without doubt, if clubs are to successfully diversify and grow participation, a more sophisticated and relevant approach to course setup is required for slow swing speed golfers. The vast majority of women take up golf around retirement age - a long learning curve then commences for the few who are prepared to persevere with a time consuming, often costly and difficult game. The truth is that many golf courses do not adequately address this market from a course design/course setup perspective.

Bottom line: Course setup influences scoring, enjoyment, pace of play and participation  - and participation levels impact the financial viability of clubs.

Lyne



Note: I share the above comments as an involved female golfer; I have played the game for over forty years and have observed women's play across a wide range of levels and a variety of courses. I am acutely aware of the decline of women's participation in golf in Australia. I also work in the industry and am familiar with past and current international research on this subject.

[John Kavanaugh]

I would be shocked if women enjoy the use of caddies. I would say for so many of the same reasons that I don't.

[Jud_T]

Lynn,

Thanks for the thoughtful comments. Now we need to address the lack of female participation here!

[Benjamin Litman]

Lynn,

Thanks for the thoughtful comments. Now we need to address the lack of female participation here!

Amen to that. Lyne, thank you for cutting through (and ignoring) the nonsense and addressing this issue as Mike initially intended it to be addressed when he began this thread.

[Mark Pavy]

In the interest of informed content, I offer the following response to the discussion relating to women's golf and perceived slow play.

From a course design perspective, course setup plays a significant role in pace of play.

On traditionally laid out courses most men reach par 3's with their tee shot - while the green is frequently out of reach or requires accomplished long wood play for many women.  Where women are required to play two shots to reach a par 3 this takes more time.

Similarly, most average male golfers are able to reach par 4's in regulation. Again, most average women golfers are not. This is primarily due to tee placement dictating the need for additional shot making.

The average or typical female golfer (31 hcp. in Australia) often takes four shots (or more) to reach a par 5 while the average male (19.5 hcp. in Aust.) takes two or three shots. Additional required shots contribute to playing time.

Add to the mix a low trajectory ball flight, the elements, testing forced carries, heavy rough and ball searching, creeks, water and ball retrieval, deep bunkers, hardpan sand, closely guarded greens etc. Such hazards require many women and other slow swing speed golfers to either play defensively and lay-up before hazards, or 'take their medicine'. Both options require additional playing time.

Women's tees were originally an afterthought in course design. This tee was placed at a token distance in front of the men with minimal, arguably nil, understanding of the influence this position would have on play. This antiquated approach to tee positioning continues to influence female golfer participation in contemporary society. Internationally, some clubs have addressed this situation - many have not.

For those clubs looking to embrace a diverse and contemporary market I suggest it is necessary for the golf industry as a whole (including administrators, club managers, boards, committees and golfers in general) to better understand course setup and the impact this has on playability and enjoyment of the game for slower swing speed golfers.

To appropriately address the subject it is not necessary to 'dumb down courses' - this is far too simplistic. Golfers seeking an exact test of play are, and will remain well catered for.

At the same time both genders vary in their approach and attitude toward pace of play. Despite the challenge of long courses, the vast majority of club women golfers I have observed meet pace of play guidelines while adhering to etiquette and the rules of the game.

Without doubt, if clubs are to successfully diversify and grow participation, a more sophisticated and relevant approach to course setup is required for slow swing speed golfers. The vast majority of women take up golf around retirement age - a long learning curve then commences for the few who are prepared to persevere with a time consuming, often costly and difficult game. The truth is that many golf courses do not adequately address this market from a course design/course setup perspective.

Bottom line: Course setup influences scoring, enjoyment, pace of play and participation  - and participation levels impact the financial viability of clubs.

Lyne



Note: I share the above comments as an involved female golfer; I have played the game for over forty years and have observed women's play across a wide range of levels and a variety of courses. I am acutely aware of the decline of women's participation in golf in Australia. I also work in the industry and am familiar with past and current international research on this subject.

Lyne,

Whilst you raise some valid points regarding catering to slower swing speed golfers from a course design perspective, it would be difficult to argue this point being responsible for a decline in women's participation, as the issue has been ever present.

What do you see as the main contributing factors to the decline in women's participation?

[Jud_T]

Mark,

While you have a point, as the distances gained by technology have increased, arguably so has the differential between high and low swing speed golfers; and so therefore has the impact of poor tee placement.  This is an issue for all golfers, not just women, although they get the shortest shrift in many instances.

[Ken Moum]

Mark and Jud...

You both have valid points, but one thing you overlooked is the effect of course conditioning, especially in the US.  Alice Dye has campaigned for shorter tees based on the fact tht fairway irrigation has REALLY hurt the average woman due to the lack of roll out.

I'm about to head out for my 18th round in Scotland since May 17, all with my wife.  She's a better-than-average 67-y-o woman at a 15 handicap, and there are VERY few par fours or fives on most courses back home that she can reach in regulation.  With the fairway firmness she's seeing here, that's not as much of a problem, even though the red tees here are much longer than anything she'd play at home.

Another factor is that there's a wider range of yardages here.

K

[Mike Schott]

It's kind of funny that the clubs I've belonged to, all of which have incredibly cheap costs of membership compared to the kind of places Shiv is talking about, treat women and kids as plain old golfers. Exactly as they treat men.

If I were the sort of person to engage in rash generalization I might speculate that there's some common factor between the huge (by my standards) expense of belonging to those clubs and the fact that such clubs treat women as second-class members. Maybe having "women's times" or "women's days" seems perfectly natural to the same sorts of individuals for whom ten grand a year and a hundred grand to join seems like an affordable way to get your golf. Those clubs are also in many cases of, by and for people who think paying someone 50 or 100 bucks to schlep their golf bag for them every round is an expected part of the game.

But like most generalizations it might ring true enough when I say it but the reality is no doubt much more nuanced, having more to do with place, time and selective recall than with innate characteristics of "those people". From my vantage point, the "rich entitled country club guy" is a tempting meme to buy into. From some other vantages points the "women play slow" meme is equally quote-unquote "obvious".

Women are even slower on random munis that at fancy schmancy clubs.  The one thing I will say about women is that they're amazing about letting people play through.  Why might that be?  (Hint:  they get lots of practice at it!!) 

David, the primary reason you find slow women on the course is that many casual women's golfers are not good and are not as serious about the game as the men who play on a regular basis. I know women who play weekly and are serious about the game who play as fast as most men. Then again there are casual male golfers who think golf is an excuse to party and drink copious amounts of alcohol. They are among the slowest golfers in my experience.

[John Kavanaugh]

Women are not slow golfers, they are "slow as" golfers. They are slow as the group in front of them because they refuse to play through. Today was a perfect example. A husband/wife, both excellent golfers tee off behind us as a twosome and wait for us every hole. It's disturbing to us, it's disturbing to them and it was disturbing to a number of other groups behind. Please, if you are shy, skip a hole and give us our privacy.

I know that everyone on this site besides me plays so fast that they don't understand what it's like to be hounded from behind. For the considerate golfer it's worse than waiting.