The case against "play it forward" (as well as "play it back")

[Jeff_Brauer]

Sean,


I have been trying to apply the shortest walk theory, but of course, not enough new designs to do it.  If given the opportunity, and the next hole plays 90 deg. to the previous one, there is a chance to route the path and locate the previous green so the shortest travel distance is to the middle tees, not the back tee.  So few play back there, that I try to establish the shortest route for the 6-6300 yard players who make up 50+% of players.  Harder on a back and forth routing.


Aligning holes and designing holes from the back tees forward is just another manifestation of our fascination with pros who will never show up at our courses.....


But as in TD's "How short is too short for a top 100?" thread, as long as the local muni thinks in those terms, it won't forgo the 7200 yard tees. In reality, 6850 back tees is long enough for any muni and most clubs.  It only decreases the play experience for 1% of golfers.  Just as I think the real option on Tour is a limited rotation of really long courses, I think we need to find some label other than championship course for good courses of rational length that wouldn't send potential customers away before even trying the course.


Andy,


As I was recently told, sticking with tradition is also a way of saying "refuses to change with the times."  On the national level, we are discussing statues of Confederates, KKK, and other things where proponents say tradition demands something or other.  Not that forward tees are anything as severe as that, but it makes the point.


The funny thing is, the restoration movement celebrates the courses of the 1920's, many of which (Northland, SFGC to name two) were renovated to oblivion by the architects now famous.  Those guys knew the early courses weren't suitable and had no trouble blowing it up, designing for future needs.  Yes, I am getting far afield, but I think design is always more sincere, if you will, if form follows function, looks forward, not back, etc.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Or to put it less dramatically and more simply, just because it isn't perfect, and won't solve every problem, is that reason to not try it to test if they work?  And perhaps refine based on experience?


The Wright Brothers didn't come out of the box with the 787 Dreamliner.

[Ulrich Mayring]

I'm totally with Sean here. More than two sets of tees is hurting the integrity of the design. Go build courses of different lengths to cater to different golfers, but keep each course interesting and walkable.

Hell, you're not going to record a CD that caters to heavy metal lovers as well as classical music fans and the disco crowd? And if you do, that music is hardly going to have any integrity to it.

Ulrich

[Tom_Doak]

I'm totally with Sean here. More than two sets of tees is hurting the integrity of the design. Go build courses of different lengths to cater to different golfers, but keep each course interesting and walkable.

Hell, you're not going to record a CD that caters to heavy metal lovers as well as classical music fans and the disco crowd? And if you do, that music is hardly going to have any integrity to it.

Ulrich

The funny part is that a course with two tees per hole has many, many different potential total lengths, depending on how many times you ask the player to use the back tee. 


The ridiculous part is where every golfer wants every hole optimized for himself.

[Thomas Dai]

Spoke with some juniors earlier in the year at a much loved and highly rated links course frequented by many visitors including no doubt many posting herein.
They love the fact that many visitors want to play "off the backs" or at least from tees that are inappropriate to their game.........loads of hardly used ProV1's scattered and lost all over the course.....perfect for juniors to find and play with!
Atb

[Garland Bayley]

The funny part is that a course with two tees per hole has many, many different potential total lengths, depending on how many times you ask the player to use the back tee. 


The ridiculous part is where every golfer wants every hole optimized for himself.

If the USGA were on the ball, they would create an app where you could play any combination of tees you want and still immediately be able to post your score.

I understand they have produced an app that will use gps to follow you as you play so course owners can learn where players visit on their courses, and how often. An Oregon Golf Association volunteer who is a member at my club and who keeps bugging me to volunteer on their handicapping told me they will be distributing the app sometime soon. If they can track you that well, they can automatically determine the tees you play and put together the rating automatically.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Thomas,

I will have to add "find more golf balls hit by fools" as an added benefit to shorter courses.

Yes, there is no doubt the app is the way things will go.  For those hoping for cardless courses without tee markers, future golfers may adapt it, but only because they can get the yardage info they want some other, high tech way.


 

[Bob Montle]

Jeff_Brauer, thanks for your detailed comments.  I'm in complete agreement.

My local public course has five sets of tees - very easy to maintain because they just mow a circle of short fairway.
Playing our appropriate tees makes the game more enjoyable for my family.
I'm 68 and play from the 5600 yd tees
My wife is 54 and plays from the 4700 yd tees, and
her son (24) plays from the 6500 yd tees.

Our average 18 hole scores are usually within a stroke of each other which makes matches extremely interesting for us, without messing with handicap strokes.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Bob,


Thanks, and with your permission, I will add yours to the growing list of success stories on forward tee use.


Tom Doak,


I'm not sure I agree with either of these statements:


The funny part is that a course with two tees per hole has many, many different potential total lengths, depending on how many times you ask the player to use the back tee. 


Really?  If one tees play at 6300 and the other at 6600, then the total range of yardages is limited between those two.  You might have 300 potentially different course yardages, but the range is still pretty narrow.  At say, 20 yards per hole different, the most any hole would change would be two to three clubs.  While some variety, it doesn't really account for the vast differences in driving distance between certain types of typical players.

The ridiculous part is where every golfer wants every hole optimized for himself.

Well, I agree there is a practical limit, but see no reason in principal why that should be a problem.  If someone pays hard earned money to play golf, they ought to be able to tailor it somewhat to max out their enjoyment.  Why is it better to force them into someone else's preconceived notion of what is good for them or they ought to like?

[Garland Bayley]

Bob,


Thanks, and with your permission, I will add yours to the growing list of success stories on forward tee use.

And if five out of six players at the course dislike the situation, you somehow count it in his favor?


Tom Doak,


I'm not sure I agree with either of these statements:


The funny part is that a course with two tees per hole has many, many different potential total lengths, depending on how many times you ask the player to use the back tee. 


Really?  If one tees play at 6300 and the other at 6600, then the total range of yardages is limited between those two.

Clearly he didn't mean that. Perhaps 5400 and 6600, but not what you suggest. Why didn't you get that?

You might have 300 potentially different course yardages, but the range is still pretty narrow.  At say, 20 yards per hole different, the most any hole would change would be two to three clubs.  While some variety, it doesn't really account for the vast differences in driving distance between certain types of typical players.

The ridiculous part is where every golfer wants every hole optimized for himself.

Well, I agree there is a practical limit, but see no reason in principal why that should be a problem.  If someone pays hard earned money to play golf, they ought to be able to tailor it somewhat to max out their enjoyment. 

It would be cheaper to give them an app and let them tee it up where ever they want on a level piece of land. Building additional tees only slightly allows tailoring.

Why is it better to force them into someone else's preconceived notion of what is good for them or they ought to like?

And all the play it forward nonsense, and use appropriate tees is not "force them into someone else's preconceived notion of what is good for them"?

[Jeff_Brauer]

Garland,


There is a legit debate as to whether those forward tees should just be markers in the fw (less clutter more freedom) or if those golfers prefer to start on a measured tee (because its what everyone else does, may need specific yards for handicap, etc.)


Adding forward tees in no way forces anyone to play them, at least at any course I have seen. I have seen tee recommendations based on handicap (Rivera when I played there) and tee shot distance, but they are just guidelines as far as I can tell.  Golfers are mostly free to move up or back to suit their game that day.  How is more choice in any way more restrictive?

[Garland Bayley]

Jeff,

My point was that you don't even need teeing grounds and markers if they have an app that records where they start from, and automatically does the handicap calculations.

The tee it forward people are forcing players to a different tee by pressure and misinformation. The low handicapper that plays in 4 1/2 hours is telling the high handicapper that plays in 3 1/2 hours to play a course he doesn't want to play, because the low handicapper in under the mistaken notion that it will speed up play and give him more enjoyment. However, the opposite is likely the case. The high handicapper takes little time to hit each shot and enjoys whacking the ball around, while the low handicapper takes a lot of time to hit each shot and enjoys shooting low scores. Move the low handicapper forward so he will shot a lower score, take less time, and enjoy his round more. Move the high handicapper back so he will get extra whacks that he enjoys, take marginally more time (less that a minute for 5 shots at 10 seconds each), and enjoy his round more.

As an architect you need to eliminate the need for searching for lost balls and eliminate forced carries, and both low and high handicappers can be happy. My regular group is three high handicaps and one low handicap. It is the low handicap that pines for playing forward, and often does so on his own. He also has the slow poke reputation.

[Ulrich Mayring]

The funny part is that a course with two tees per hole has many, many different potential total lengths, depending on how many times you ask the player to use the back tee.

No, that course only has two lengths, depending on which tee you use. Of course if a golfer wants to switch back and forth, he can do so, but the course isn't rated for that and thus no competetive rounds could be played that way. That being said, in practice I've never seen golfers switching tees during a round EXCEPT when they want to avoid walking 100 yards back! Which wouldn't be an issue on a course with two tees, it would turn out that one tee was used by men and one by ladies and kids, seniors might choose one or the other.

Ulrich

[Garland Bayley]

The funny part is that a course with two tees per hole has many, many different potential total lengths, depending on how many times you ask the player to use the back tee.

No, that course only has two lengths, depending on which tee you use. Of course if a golfer wants to switch back and forth, he can do so, but the course isn't rated for that and thus no competetive rounds could be played that way. That being said, in practice I've never seen golfers switching tees during a round EXCEPT when they want to avoid walking 100 yards back! Which wouldn't be an issue on a course with two tees, it would turn out that one tee was used by men and one by ladies and kids, seniors might choose one or the other.

Ulrich

Don't know how things are done in Germany, but the USGA publishes a table to adjust ratings when you mix tees. So yes you can play competetive rounds by mixing tees. In fact, they rate each tee of each hole, so if an app has access to that database it can calculate the exact rating. Or, if you just tee it up in the fairway somewhere, it can use the table to calculate a rating by yardage difference from a rated set of tees. So you can even play rounds and post teeing it up where ever you want.

My buddies and I played for about six months from a mix of three different tees on our course and posted all our scores. I think the mix of these tees produces a more interesting course than any of the defined tees.

The front nine of our course is very narrow, so we shortened it. The back nine is more wide open, so we lengthened it.
We also varied the hole yardages much more significantly than could be found on defined tees. We also brought the most significant tee shot turbo boost into play, which is from the back tees that we wouldn't normally play.

[Bob Montle]

Bob,

Thanks, and with your permission, I will add yours to the growing list of success stories on forward tee use.

Of course, Jeff

What is especially nice is that if we all three hit good drives, my wife is longest and her son is shortest.   She gets the chance to crow, and us guys have to try a little harder on our second shots.  You might be surprised how often we hit the same clubs for our seconds.

[Sean_A]

The funny part is that a course with two tees per hole has many, many different potential total lengths, depending on how many times you ask the player to use the back tee.

No, that course only has two lengths, depending on which tee you use. Of course if a golfer wants to switch back and forth, he can do so, but the course isn't rated for that and thus no competetive rounds could be played that way. That being said, in practice I've never seen golfers switching tees during a round EXCEPT when they want to avoid walking 100 yards back! Which wouldn't be an issue on a course with two tees, it would turn out that one tee was used by men and one by ladies and kids, seniors might choose one or the other.

Ulrich

I routinely don't bother to walk back to daily tees.  In the UK its fairly rare that the daily tee offers a better hole compared to the forward tee.  There are only two holes at my course which require a walkback that I think makes a difference in quality.  The 12th is a better hole with the walkback, but the 13th is not.  All the others are similar in quality or require the same type of walk anyway. If I look at the tees and merely see added yardage with the walkback I am almost always in favour of not bothering....life is too short for such nonsense. I want to be properly rewarded for the extra walk.

Ciao

[Jeff_Brauer]

Of course, Jeff

What is especially nice is that if we all three hit good drives, my wife is longest and her son is shortest.   She gets the chance to crow, and us guys have to try a little harder on our second shots.  You might be surprised how often we hit the same clubs for our seconds.

With so many scrambles played these days, shorter yardage makes women very desirable as golf partners.


Hitting the same club is the ideal for many in this new design paradigm, and glad to hear (another!) story of people who enjoy it.  After some initial resistance, playing irons to greens most of the day turns out to be really, really fun for seniors and women, at least in our experiences.  And, it doesn't seem to detract from your game at all.......