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.


Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Long Par 4s - How Many Should a Golf Course Ideally Have?
« Reply #25 on: October 12, 2015, 04:14:16 PM »
Adrian


2000 yards of tees plus the modern concept of distance between tees and greens...45 minutes for a 4ball.  How is that concept addressing slow play?  We shall have to agree to disagree.  I am never going to buy that 2000 yard spread of tees and long distances between greens and tees does not significantly contribute to slow play. Why would I when I have years of experience telling getting around a 6000 yard classic course is far quicker than the modern 7000 yard concept? 


Duncan


Flat bellies like to belong to 7000 yard courses because its easier to maintain a low handicap at those places...all of these guys are relatively long so length is rarely an issue.  But because of the added length the SSS goes up to two or so shots above par.  You do the math for a guy who hits a ways.  Shoot 75 on the 7000 yard course to keep a scratch handicap or 67/68 at a 6000 yard course to remain scratch?   Its a no brainer for guys who can comfortably hit two shots 525 yards.


Ciao
New plays planned for 2024: Nothing

Adam Lawrence

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Long Par 4s - How Many Should a Golf Course Ideally Have?
« Reply #26 on: October 12, 2015, 04:14:37 PM »
I don't disagree, Duncan, but I'm struggling to think of a bunch of long modern courses round your area to which those guys could decamp if they did want that.
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.

Adrian_Stiff

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Long Par 4s - How Many Should a Golf Course Ideally Have?
« Reply #27 on: October 12, 2015, 05:04:25 PM »
But this is not a problem affecting many players.

Last week I played in a social 4-ball including a +4 handicapper, and thus one of the best amateurs in the country. On the handful of occasions he played a driver, he hit the ball well over 300 yards, and consequently had a district advantage over the rest of us. However, the shot that we all had on him on these holes meant that he had to press home that advantage with a good short game. Which of course, he did.

A few days later I played with a very good 2 handicapper in a Stableford comp. He clearly had an advantage over me off the tee, but this time it was maybe 30 yards at best, and not the 70 yards+ I had experienced a few days earlier. This I could live with, and is far more the norm.

You might imagine that the +4 guy would want to play regularly at a "Championship" course of 7000 yards so that he could use his prodigious length to his advantage. But no, he would rather be a member at a course of true quality which tests his all-round ability, even at only 6000 yards.

The large number of very low handicap golfers we have at Reddish Vale suggests that  good players do not necessarily crave long courses.
Duncan - There are 3000ish golf courses in the UK & Ireland only 84 are 7000 yard courses in the UK of which about a quarter are in the Golf World top 100 GB & I.
A combination of whats good for golf and good for turf.
The Players Club, Cumberwell Park, The Kendleshire, Oake Manor, Dainton Park, Forest Hills, Erlestoke, St Cleres.
www.theplayersgolfclub.com

Jon Wiggett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Long Par 4s - How Many Should a Golf Course Ideally Have?
« Reply #28 on: October 12, 2015, 05:26:47 PM »
Duncan - There are 3000ish golf courses in the UK & Ireland only 84 are 7000 yard courses in the UK of which about a quarter are in the Golf World top 100 GB & I.
[/quote]

Adrian,

84 are the 7000 yards you claim is now needed to please todays player but 2900ish are not this length. Do you not begin to think maybe players are putting very little if any worth on length. I am in full agreement with you that location, price and camaraderie play the lion's share in deciding where people play.

As far as the course is concerned, I believe most players look for fun golf with a smattering of reasonably challenging holes. I actually think most players prefer few extra par 3s and short par 4s rather than too many long par 4s and par 5s.

Jon
« Last Edit: October 13, 2015, 03:31:33 AM by Jon Wiggett »

Adrian_Stiff

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Long Par 4s - How Many Should a Golf Course Ideally Have?
« Reply #29 on: October 12, 2015, 05:32:26 PM »
Adrian


2000 yards of tees plus the modern concept of distance between tees and greens...45 minutes for a 4ball.  How is that concept addressing slow play?  We shall have to agree to disagree.  I am never going to buy that 2000 yard spread of tees and long distances between greens and tees does not significantly contribute to slow play. Why would I when I have years of experience telling getting around a 6000 yard classic course is far quicker than the modern 7000 yard concept? 


Duncan


Flat bellies like to belong to 7000 yard courses because its easier to maintain a low handicap at those places...all of these guys are relatively long so length is rarely an issue.  But because of the added length the SSS goes up to two or so shots above par.  You do the math for a guy who hits a ways.  Shoot 75 on the 7000 yard course to keep a scratch handicap or 67/68 at a 6000 yard course to remain scratch?   Its a no brainer for guys who can comfortably hit two shots 525 yards.


Ciao
Sean - If its is the walking aspect we are not agreeing on then just buy a pedometer and time yourself over 100 yards, 1 minute is a pretty normal walking rate, 3.5mph for 60 minutes = 6160 yards. A lot of people walk as fast as 117 yards per minute.
If a course is easier it will be quicker and shorter courses are generally easier so in that respect I 100% agree, longer courses naturally have longer approach shots and so more effective three shot holes. The effective amount of three shot holes will plus the time, a course with 6 par 3 holes can be significantly quickly than one with just 3. The time taken in each stroke is considerable, drives, iron shots, pitches, chips, bunker shots all take time, the shorter shots can take longer and under medal play it can go off the scale.
A combination of whats good for golf and good for turf.
The Players Club, Cumberwell Park, The Kendleshire, Oake Manor, Dainton Park, Forest Hills, Erlestoke, St Cleres.
www.theplayersgolfclub.com

Adrian_Stiff

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Long Par 4s - How Many Should a Golf Course Ideally Have?
« Reply #30 on: October 12, 2015, 05:52:23 PM »
Duncan - There are 3000ish golf courses in the UK & Ireland only 84 are 7000 yard courses in the UK of which about a quarter are in the Golf World top 100 GB & I.

Adrian,

84 are the 7000 yards you claim is now needed to please todays player but 2900ish are not this length. Do you not begin to think maybe players are putting very little if any worth on length. I am in full agreement with you that location, price and camaraderie play the lion share in deciding where people play.

As far as the course is concerned, I believe most players look for fun golf with a smattering of reasonably challenging holes. I actually think most players prefer few extra par 3s and short par 4s rather than too many long par 4s and par 5s.

Jon
Jon - I tend to take the view the better courses are 7000 yards. The statistics tend to back that up if you look at the top 100 ratings and use that as a yardstick. 19 out of the top 25 are 7000+ and 32 are top 100. 6750 par 71 or 6500 par 70 is pretty much the same bar though. That is the strength of the course. The courses that are sub 6000 yards are marked down, I think there are only two under 6200 yards in the last Golf World top 100. I think for most people location, mates and price just over-ride where they want to play regularly but give those people a day's outing they want something a bit special. Special and the shorter courses just don't go together. People likely to build courses from now on will be in the bracket of wanting to do something special. I am not wholly disagreeing with you that what is wanted is the shorter courses I just don't see anyone investing in it or an existing club shortening their course to fill a mythical gap in the market, it would just never get past the members.
« Last Edit: October 12, 2015, 06:27:29 PM by Adrian_Stiff »
A combination of whats good for golf and good for turf.
The Players Club, Cumberwell Park, The Kendleshire, Oake Manor, Dainton Park, Forest Hills, Erlestoke, St Cleres.
www.theplayersgolfclub.com

Joe Bausch

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Long Par 4s - How Many Should a Golf Course Ideally Have?
« Reply #31 on: October 12, 2015, 07:49:13 PM »
(an answer from the seat of my pants)
 
How many long par 4's should an ideal golf course have?


At least as many as the course has good short par 4's.
@jwbausch (for new photo albums)
The site for the Cobb's Creek project:  https://cobbscreek.org/
Nearly all Delaware Valley golf courses in photo albums: Bausch Collection

mike_malone

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Long Par 4s - How Many Should a Golf Course Ideally Have?
« Reply #32 on: October 12, 2015, 09:51:59 PM »
2 1/2
AKA Mayday

Thomas Dai

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Long Par 4s - How Many Should a Golf Course Ideally Have?
« Reply #33 on: October 13, 2015, 03:33:08 AM »
To paraphrase what's been said before, once a certain level of golfing ability and course management has been reached scoring is all about how far the player can hit the ball.

I disagree.

I would say that once a certain level of golfing ability and course management has been reached scoring is all about consistency, accuracy, and a good short game. Above all, putting.

The differences on how far players can hit the ball are taken care of by the handicap system.

 I don't have a problem with courses having too many long par 4s because of the difficulty. I have a problem with too many long par 4s because it gets tedious. 

The vast majority of golf is played within 150 yards of the green; what happens then is far more important than what happens on the way there.


For what it's worth, I include such things as "consistancy, accuracy, and a good short game. Above all putting" within my definition of reaching "a certain level of golfing ability and course management".


And I happen to disagree that the handicap system takes car of the length issue. It ought to, but in reality I don't believe it does.






atb
« Last Edit: October 13, 2015, 04:23:20 AM by Thomas Dai »

Paul Gray

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Long Par 4s - How Many Should a Golf Course Ideally Have?
« Reply #34 on: October 13, 2015, 06:23:54 PM »
Adrian,

I'm not sure that a Golf World ranking is a particularly accurate measure of quality. I know you've been disparaging about such ratings on more than one occasion before now.

Regardless, I'm pretty sure you've got the chicken and the egg the wrong way round in your inference. The very best courses have had the funds available and a commercial incentive to become longer for events such as The Open. Slightly lesser courses have done similar for want of an invite to hold some qualifier or other. In other words, courses have got longer because they are good, rather than being good because they are long.
In the places where golf cuts through pretension and elitism, it thrives and will continue to thrive because the simple virtues of the game and its attendant culture are allowed to be most apparent. - Tim Gavrich

Adrian_Stiff

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Long Par 4s - How Many Should a Golf Course Ideally Have?
« Reply #35 on: October 13, 2015, 07:08:10 PM »
Adrian,

I'm not sure that a Golf World ranking is a particularly accurate measure of quality. I know you've been disparaging about such ratings on more than one occasion before now.

Regardless, I'm pretty sure you've got the chicken and the egg the wrong way round in your inference. The very best courses have had the funds available and a commercial incentive to become longer for events such as The Open. Slightly lesser courses have done similar for want of an invite to hold some qualifier or other. In other words, courses have got longer because they are good, rather than being good because they are long.
Golf World Rankings are the industry standard one's since the mid 80s. Like a lot of things its easy to find love for the one the has 'your course' highest and unlove the ones that you don't think are right.
You are wrong in what you are saying that if a club has funds available it can become longer. Some courses simply can't. The best courses are in the top 100, the next best courses are in the top 200 and so on. There is a constant pattern that shorter courses are marked down. Most of the newer breakthroughs started out at 7000 yards from conception. Very few new breakthroughs (in the top 200) are sub 6500 yards. A shorter course like New Zealand would be much higher if it was 500 yards longer. It just has too many easy par 4 holes. 32% of the top 100 are 7000 yards, probably 32% are less than 6700 yards. It is the same pattern in the 101-200. Courses that are less than 6700 still have the strength with a lot of long par four holes, not so many fives (sometimes one or none)and have a 69 or 70 par so still play close to the same 7000 bar in relative terms. These courses in the top 100/200/300 will nearly all have a good percentage of strong/hard/tough  430 yard plus holes. There is a pattern.
A combination of whats good for golf and good for turf.
The Players Club, Cumberwell Park, The Kendleshire, Oake Manor, Dainton Park, Forest Hills, Erlestoke, St Cleres.
www.theplayersgolfclub.com

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Long Par 4s - How Many Should a Golf Course Ideally Have?
« Reply #36 on: October 13, 2015, 07:31:56 PM »

32% of the top 100 are 7000 yards, probably 32% are less than 6700 yards.



Adrian


The above is not a great advertisement for length especially when we consider that


1. A significant percentage of the 32% which qre 7000 yards will be classic courses which were always considered great, the added yardage did not confer greatness. 


2. A significant percentage of the long moderns have not stood any test of time for greatness.  Let us wait 25 years and see where some of these courses stand.  For certain, there are many classic courses which could easily replace a number of the new courses even now...depending on who you talk to. 


3. A significant percentage of all 7000 yard courses rarely use those tees so its interesting to think who is ranking these courses based on back tees. 


It is a sad day when yardage equals greatness.


Ciao
New plays planned for 2024: Nothing

Paul Gray

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Long Par 4s - How Many Should a Golf Course Ideally Have?
« Reply #37 on: October 13, 2015, 07:51:37 PM »
Adrian,


Whether the golf industry wants to listen to Golf World or not doesn't interest me. Putting Golf World to one side for a minute, and also ignoring my chicken and egg argument, are you personally suggesting that long equals good?
In the places where golf cuts through pretension and elitism, it thrives and will continue to thrive because the simple virtues of the game and its attendant culture are allowed to be most apparent. - Tim Gavrich

Peter Pallotta

Re: Long Par 4s - How Many Should a Golf Course Ideally Have?
« Reply #38 on: October 13, 2015, 11:38:57 PM »
This is an interesting discussion, and, while sometimes I fall into "black and white" thinking, it is clear to me that the questions/issues that Adrian is raising and others are debating are complex. Here's just one example: the way gca-loving golfers like Sean and I view holes with yardages between 230ish and 310ish, and how we play them, and why we might appreciate them, represents just one slice/segment of a wide range of possible reactions and playing-approaches to such holes by various golfers (and indeed, I like/appreciate such holes less than Sean does, and would like to see fewer of them on a given course than he would.) I can think of many a high handicapper who would turn their noses up at the preponderance of "short" holes on such a course (and the resulting modest total yardage), sniffing that it's for "beginners", no matter how many of us (low handicappers included) bleat from the sidelines about the "charm" of such drive-able or option-filled golf holes.  Similarly, only one amongst several slices/segments of the golfing population will likely see and appreciate a 460 yard Par 5 as a "half-par" hole, and former flat-bellied low handicappers now aging but still full of pride will experience and try to play a 440 yard Par 4 much differently than an always-average golfer who could never have reached the green in two and who now would expect to par such a hole only very rarely, if ever. What I'm saying is pretty simply and obvious, but I thought it worth saying: 7,000 yards is not (the same) 7,000 yards for everybody, and what many of us here mean by 7,000 yards might mean the same thing to almost nobody. I'm an average golfer of modest abilities and average length who likes nothing better than several long and very long Par 3s and many many 400ish Par 4s, and a couple of very stout Par 4s, but who has rarely met a Par 5 that I've ever really liked so would be very content with just 2 (very good) Par 5s that are true 3 shotters for most everybody. What kind of yardage would that add up to, and what would that yardage and kind of course mean/represent to most others?  I have no idea.
« Last Edit: October 14, 2015, 09:26:14 AM by PPallotta »

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re: Long Par 4s - How Many Should a Golf Course Ideally Have?
« Reply #39 on: October 13, 2015, 11:47:09 PM »
Does not the answer to this question depend entirely on what sort of course someone wants to build? 


And does it not also depend on how many par-5 holes are included?  If you've got four par-5's you don't need a bunch of long 4's, too ... but there are many fine UK courses which have several long 4's and only one or two par-5's.


People told me years ago that a modern course couldn't be top-100 material unless it was 7000 yards long, so I made a point of keeping Pacific Dunes [and Barnbougle, too] short of that length.  The fact that they're in windy areas mitigates the overall length factor ... sometimes the 400-yard par-4's at each course are unreachable in two!  But, even though both are considered "short" courses, they each have a cadre of long 4's [Pacific:  4th, 7th, 8th, 13th; and Barnbougle:  8th, 10th, 17th, 18th].  Therefore, I guess the answer to your question must be "4".


Also, an interesting discussion point:  I was very surprised to find Cabot Cliffs had ZERO [yes, zero] long par-4's.  Of course, it only has six par-4's total, and the longest, I believe, was only 410 yards.  They must be counting on the wind to make a couple of them play long on any given day, but on the two calm days we had, there were no long par-4's there.  [However, there WERE six par-5's.]

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Long Par 4s - How Many Should a Golf Course Ideally Have?
« Reply #40 on: October 14, 2015, 03:54:13 AM »
I'm an average golfer of modest abilities and average length who likes nothing better than several long and very long Par 3s and many many 400ish Par 4s, and a couple of very stout Par 4s, but who has rarely met a Par 5 that I've ever really liked so would be very content with just 2 (very good) Par 5s that are true 3 shotters for most everybody. What kind of yardage would [/size]that[/color][/size] add up to, and what would that yardage and kind of course [/color][/size]mean/represent[/color][/size] to most others?  I have no idea.[/color][/i][/b]
[/size][/color][/i][/b]
[/size]To be honest, the above sounds like a recipe for a very long and trying day that requires an inordinate amount of wood play.  For mine, it would have to pulled off in very "easy" manner before I would consider handing my money over the counter.  [/color]
[/size][/color]
[/size]It may sound harsh, but many golfers really don't have clue.  They will complain about 5 hour rounds and cost, but then scoff at 6300 yard courses.  Its about as logical as an Irishman in a pub [/color] 8) [/size][/color]
[/size][/color]
[/size]Ciao[/color]
New plays planned for 2024: Nothing

Adrian_Stiff

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Long Par 4s - How Many Should a Golf Course Ideally Have?
« Reply #41 on: October 14, 2015, 09:06:47 AM »
Adrian,


Whether the golf industry wants to listen to Golf World or not doesn't interest me. Putting Golf World to one side for a minute, and also ignoring my chicken and egg argument, are you personally suggesting that long equals good?
I think 7000 yards par 72 is the yardstick, though 6750 par 71 and 6500 par 70 amount to the same.
As a statement I would say short equals not good. For normal play 6000 total is about right, but the flexibility to go to 7000 is a plus as it is the best way to cater for all as well as shorter tees close to 5000. The early routers of golf courses saw this.
7000 yards is not overly long and can still encompass the following lengths; 145, 170, 195, 215, 325, 350, 375, 390, 410, 425,  440, 450, 460, 470 and 520, 535, 550, 575. If it's par 70 and loses the two long fives and replaces them with with a 285 yarder and a 340 yarder that's ok at 6500. You need variety and that comes in different forms. A lot depends how you value a par 5 hole in terms of length v birdie-ability, to a good player they are easier than a 325 yarder, to a mid-capper they can be the card-ruiners. There is a very strong pattern for the top 200 golf courses that they are in this sort of range. The fact that the 'long courses' were good before is true if all the former good courses upped their yardage but many have not been able too and those have fallen away. It seems to me that courses are marked down if they don't have a number of strong holes to keep the challenge up, hardly any in the 100/200 would appear to have a SSS lower than the par score (a higher one being a show of strength).

« Last Edit: October 14, 2015, 10:55:49 AM by Adrian_Stiff »
A combination of whats good for golf and good for turf.
The Players Club, Cumberwell Park, The Kendleshire, Oake Manor, Dainton Park, Forest Hills, Erlestoke, St Cleres.
www.theplayersgolfclub.com

Jon Wiggett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Long Par 4s - How Many Should a Golf Course Ideally Have?
« Reply #42 on: October 14, 2015, 03:16:30 PM »
As a statement I would say short equals not good. For normal play 6000 total is about right, but the flexibility to go to 7000 is a plus as it is the best way to cater for all as well as shorter tees close to 5000.

I was going to leave this topic alone but I am afraid you seem to be doing a little 'do as I say and not as I do' here Adrian. If short equals not good then why build the 'Stranahan' which by your own definition is not good? but then again I suspect you are quite happy with the Stranahan and the function it fulfils so where does that leave your statement?

Jon

Adrian_Stiff

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Long Par 4s - How Many Should a Golf Course Ideally Have?
« Reply #43 on: October 14, 2015, 04:30:29 PM »
As a statement I would say short equals not good. For normal play 6000 total is about right, but the flexibility to go to 7000 is a plus as it is the best way to cater for all as well as shorter tees close to 5000.

I was going to leave this topic alone but I am afraid you seem to be doing a little 'do as I say and not as I do' here Adrian. If short equals not good then why build the 'Stranahan' which by your own definition is not good? but then again I suspect you are quite happy with the Stranahan and the function it fulfils so where does that leave your statement?

Jon
I answered your question earlier ....only had 73 acres. Your twisting Jon. I stand by my statement in the context of how I posted it... SHORT equals not good. Try and understand what that means. The Stranahan is no world beater it serves a function the same as your not good course. The world needs ditch diggers too.
A combination of whats good for golf and good for turf.
The Players Club, Cumberwell Park, The Kendleshire, Oake Manor, Dainton Park, Forest Hills, Erlestoke, St Cleres.
www.theplayersgolfclub.com

Jon Wiggett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Long Par 4s - How Many Should a Golf Course Ideally Have?
« Reply #44 on: October 14, 2015, 06:24:44 PM »
Adrian,

I understand that short means it is probably not going to be a world beater but to say any course less than 7000 yards is not good is to me staggering and something I totally disagree with. I am not twisting anything. You said

SHORT equals not good

I understand that you only had 73 acres but unlike you I do not see this as being any reason not to produce a quality golf course that is fun and interesting to play. Interestingly your website does not mention anything about it being 'not good' in fact it gives exactly the opposite impression

I would say Kilspindie is a good course. I would say that Brora is a good course. I would say that Boat of Garten is a good course.

I certainly prefer to be in my ditch digger's world as I have a vast array of quality golf courses to play. It would be sad to have your outlook on golf and be only be left with a few decent courses to chose from.

Jon
« Last Edit: October 14, 2015, 10:26:32 PM by Jon Wiggett »

Paul Gray

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Long Par 4s - How Many Should a Golf Course Ideally Have?
« Reply #45 on: October 14, 2015, 06:51:54 PM »
Adrian,


Whether the golf industry wants to listen to Golf World or not doesn't interest me. Putting Golf World to one side for a minute, and also ignoring my chicken and egg argument, are you personally suggesting that long equals good?



As a statement I would say short equals not good.



Well I'm not sure what to say to that. I certainly can't fault your honesty. While I'm inclined to suggest I utterly disagree with you, I suppose I have my own limits; less than maybe 5,000 yards and a par of 66 and I'd probably think there was too little length to get a good mix of holes.


You did then revert back to talking about what got you ranked highly by Golf World. Not sure what that was supposed to indicate, other than how some guys at Golf World think they should rate things. I would have thought you regarded yourself as knowledgeable enough to not defer to the views of some journalists but OK.
In the places where golf cuts through pretension and elitism, it thrives and will continue to thrive because the simple virtues of the game and its attendant culture are allowed to be most apparent. - Tim Gavrich

Adrian_Stiff

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Long Par 4s - How Many Should a Golf Course Ideally Have?
« Reply #46 on: October 15, 2015, 04:31:30 AM »
I am saying 'not good' in the same terms as 'isn't great' in the context of the best courses that are in the top 100 (by Golf World). Only two courses are below 6200 yards.


My main point is that courses get marked down for being on the short side. Somewhere like Boat of Garten to me shows this point off perfectly. It is a beautiful course.







A combination of whats good for golf and good for turf.
The Players Club, Cumberwell Park, The Kendleshire, Oake Manor, Dainton Park, Forest Hills, Erlestoke, St Cleres.
www.theplayersgolfclub.com

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Long Par 4s - How Many Should a Golf Course Ideally Have?
« Reply #47 on: October 15, 2015, 08:56:02 AM »
I like the discussion idea.  CBM proposed not only ideal yardages, but what sequence they ought to be in, if possible.  I believe it pays to have some idea of the general length of course you want before jumping into design.  Only on really dramatic properties might it be hard to shift stuff slightly to modify any holes yardage to a desirable length.

For what its worth, my mentors always allowed for 2 over 400 yard par 4 holes (back tee length) one right at 400 and two under on each nine.  As an ideal, and as noted, all things being equal, which they seldom are, I still use it, although I might move the mid point up to 410-420, so its really 3 over 400 and 2 under.  But, probably only two per nine over 450.

But, with yardage differences I have started to move away from the 25-30 yard standard split model, in favor of proportional yardages.  If you put tees at 90, 80, 70 and 60% of back tee length, with good shots, they should play about the same for all.  (based on "typical tee shot yardages" of 290 back, then 260, 230, 200, 170 and 140, etc.  This makes tee splits on long 4's and 5's greater, par 3 and short par 4 less.  (example, 30 yard tee differences would be 470-440-410-380-350-320 based on 30 yard splits, whereas proportional tee differences would be 470-423-381-343-308-277.  Generally, that puts all players hitting comfortable clubs, if you use six tees.  Most combine somewhere along the way, but its futile to get exact yardage balance.

Just yesterday, I came back from a remodel where we added a back tee to the 18th to create a 485 finisher, but kept all the other tees in the same spot (but added a forward tee way up at 320 yards)

Like some others here, I think its time to forget the 7200 yard yardage on most courses.  Too much invested in so few golfers, and we have enough long courses to challenge those guys already, but do need to focus all future efforts on the real golfers who play.  Can't always get it by the marketing guys though, at least not yet.

Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Jon Wiggett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Long Par 4s - How Many Should a Golf Course Ideally Have?
« Reply #48 on: October 15, 2015, 09:40:05 AM »
I am saying 'not good' in the same terms as 'isn't great' in the context of the best courses that are in the top 100 (by Golf World). Only two courses are below 6200 yards.


My main point is that courses get marked down for being on the short side. Somewhere like Boat of Garten to me shows this point off perfectly. It is a beautiful course.

Adrian,

Okay, so not good as in any GCA without a top 100 course under their belt is not good ::) Boat of Garten is not only a beautiful course but also a very good though not great course. You seem to have backed into a corner Adrian.

Jon

Adrian_Stiff

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Long Par 4s - How Many Should a Golf Course Ideally Have?
« Reply #49 on: October 15, 2015, 10:05:23 AM »
I am saying 'not good' in the same terms as 'isn't great' in the context of the best courses that are in the top 100 (by Golf World). Only two courses are below 6200 yards.


My main point is that courses get marked down for being on the short side. Somewhere like Boat of Garten to me shows this point off perfectly. It is a beautiful course.

Adrian,

Okay, so not good as in any GCA without a top 100 course under their belt is not good ::) Boat of Garten is not only a beautiful course but also a very good though not great course. You seem to have backed into a corner Adrian.

Jon
Jon you need to get yourself checked out, you are not wired up right. I have not backed up at all. Boat of Garten is a great course in my opinion, it is not in the top 100 though and it can only be because it is too short. The Boat is what it is on a great piece of property routed by Braid, but I suppose if some of those 350 yarders were naturally 70 yards more and it was 6500 yards then it would be right up there with the best (i.e Would be better longer). All I am saying is the shorter courses seem to get marked down by the raters. You and the other idiot are mixing things up and cherry picking things out of context. Personally I like short courses but people building new courses tend to use 7000 yards as the yardstick.
A combination of whats good for golf and good for turf.
The Players Club, Cumberwell Park, The Kendleshire, Oake Manor, Dainton Park, Forest Hills, Erlestoke, St Cleres.
www.theplayersgolfclub.com

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back