The Tyranny of Eighteen Holes

[MCirba]

As we look to the most viable future for the game, it may be instructive to look to the past.   

Time constraints of folks in a hyper-activated world and acreage costs associated with resource, water, and growth constraints continue to challenge the very existence of many of our present courses as well as the feasibility of any new ones.

Golf and the creation of its courses over the centuries was a much more practical and prudent exercise than what it has evolved into.   While historical records show the game was played at least as far back as the 1400s, largely in Scotland along seaside meadows (i.e. links), it wasn't until 1764, just prior to the American Revolution, that St. Andrews consolidated a few holes from its 22 holes to become an 18 hole golf course.

While it is often believed today that this change had an immediate impact on other clubs given St. Andrews stature as the "home of golf", that would be surprisingly incorrect.   In fact, while there were no less than 32 known golf courses in existence one hundred years later, it wasn't until Old Tom Morris rearranged the links at Westward Ho! at the Royal North Devon Golf Club in 18 holes in August of 1864, 100 years after St. Andrews, that the second 18 hole course came into existence.

I've been reading a book titled "Why Are There Eighteen Holes" by Peter N. Lewis that meticulously details the growth of the game between 1764 and 1890.

From that book we find the following practical reality;

"We have already seen that traditionally the number of holes on Scottish courses was largely determined by the land available rather than trying to impose a preconceived idea of the number of holes on the land.   In 1874 there were five, six, seven,, eight, nine, ten, twelve, thirteen, fifteen, seventeen and eighteen hole courses in Scotland.   In England and the Channel Islands, there were seven, nine, ten, fourteen, and eighteen hole courses."

I have to wonder if the standardization of number of holes to eighteen has been good for golf, or a viable path forward for the game.   Food for thought. 

[jeffwarne]

As we look to the most viable future for the game, it may be instructive to look to the past.   

Time constraints of folks in a hyper-activated world and acreage costs associated with resource, water, and growth constraints continue to challenge the very existence of many of our present courses as well as the feasibility of any new ones.

Golf and the creation of its courses over the centuries was a much more practical and prudent exercise than what it has evolved into.   While historical records show the game was played at least as far back as the 1400s, largely in Scotland along seaside meadows (i.e. links), it wasn't until 1764, just prior to the American Revolution, that St. Andrews consolidated a few holes from its 22 holes to become an 18 hole golf course.


I have to wonder if the standardization of number of holes to eighteen has been good for golf, or a viable path forward for the game.   Food for thought.

Great post-
So homogonization began 150 plus years ago

[Adam Lawrence]

This is what Icelandic golf architect Edwin Roald has been talking about for several years with his Why 18 Holes campaign. See www.why18holes.com

[Niall C]

So homogonization began 150 plus years ago

Jeff

Not quite. Peter Lewis goes into detail about how 18 holes came about and it makes interesting reading. Not quite as straight forward as we now tend to think, as Mike points out. The authors writing style is a little dry and very much stat driven but if you are at all interested in early golf development it is well worth a modest outlay.

Niall

[Sean_A]

I think Prestwick going to 18 holes in the early 1890s and the Honourable Company moving to Muirfield at the same time with its new 18 hole course sealed the deal that 18 holes was a defacto proper course.  These three clubs hosted The Open.  When the R&A took over as custodians of the rules a few years later it was all over.  Its a great shame golf evolved this way, but it should be expected when codification rules the roost.

Ciao

[John Kavanaugh]

Can we explore this illusion of "Time constraints of folks in a hyper-activated world". I've got far more free time than my father before me and his father before him.

[Mark Pritchett]

One can choose to play nine holes on any eighteen hole course. 

[MCirba]

I think Prestwick going to 18 holes in the early 1890s and the Honourable Company moving to Muirfield at the same time with its new 18 hole course sealed the deal that 18 holes was a defacto proper course.  These three clubs hosted The Open.  When the R&A took over as custodians of the rules a few years later it was all over.  Its a great shame golf evolved this way, but it should be expected when codification rules the roost.

Ciao

I'm forgetting the specifics without my Muirfield course evolution book at home but wasn't the first Old Tom Morris iteration 16 holes, at least on the routing drawing by Hall Blyth?


But yes, agreed that things standardized pretty quickly in late 1800s.

[Sean_A]

I think Prestwick going to 18 holes in the early 1890s and the Honourable Company moving to Muirfield at the same time with its new 18 hole course sealed the deal that 18 holes was a defacto proper course.  These three clubs hosted The Open.  When the R&A took over as custodians of the rules a few years later it was all over.  Its a great shame golf evolved this way, but it should be expected when codification rules the roost.

Ciao

I'm forgetting the specifics without my Muirfield course evolution book at home but wasn't the first Old Tom Morris iteration 16 holes, at least on the routing drawing by Hall Blyth?


But yes, agreed that things standardized pretty quickly in late 1800s.

Mike

The 1892 inaugural Muirfield Open was the first played over 72 holes.  Are you suggesting that two holes were played twice each round to make a 72 tourny over two days?  This could be some really interesting history.

I could be wrong, but I think the 1892 Open was the only history where amateurs finished 1st and 2nd...good sports quiz question if true.

Ciao

[Adam Lawrence]

One can choose to play nine holes on any eighteen hole course.

Yes, but that's not the point people are trying to make. The thinking is that a course, and indeed a round, ought to be any number of holes. If a piece of ground has room for thirteen holes, then build a thirteen hole course. If you want to play seven holes, then you should, in a US-style handicapping system, be able to post a seven hole round and have it count towards your handicap

[Duncan Cheslett]

I have long been of the opinion that if Prestwick's 12 holes had been adopted as the standard rather than St Andrews' 18 golf would be in a healthier state today.


It would be particularly good for Reddish Vale. We could sell off our 5 weakest holes and clubhouse for housing and consolidate down in the valley with a new smaller house, terrific practice facilities, a great 12 hole course, and money in the bank.


I agree that in theory a course should have the number of holes best suited to the property, but I fear the tyranny of 18 is too deeply ingrained in golfers' psyches.

[Ed Brzezowski]

End the Tyranny of Trousers too!!

[Peter Pallotta]

I’m not usually a voice of reason around here, or of practical realities, but:

While today there might be one or two architects bold/interesting enough to design a 12 hole regulation course, and talented enough to make it stick, is there a developer alive who’d choose to work with less rather than with more? with even a modest-sized site (let alone a smaller site) rather than a site three or four times larger than necessary? with fewer options for housings or amenities/scenery rather than with almost endless ones?

Which is to say: money and profit are, I think, a lot more determinative than ancient codes (or ingrained golfers’ psyches) of the kinds of courses that are being built today.

Peter

Ed: what’s the problem with trousers? 

[Cliff Hamm]

 If land  allowed it wouldn’t three sixes instead of 2 9s be something to try ? 

[James Brown]

Interesting topic. 


Playing Bandon Preserve changed by mind on this idea a lot.   Next time I’m there I will play Sheep Ranch for the same reason. 


Does anyone know how often the shorter loops at Streamsong are used?  Ever?


Seems to me the only practical way to explore this concept at any high level of design is to add such a course to one of the destination resorts. 

[mike_malone]

I’m looking forward to the third topic in your series Mr.Cirba—— “ The Inquisition of counting strokes”.

[Ally Mcintosh]

You can't change. It would make the job of an architect too easy. I've a few ideal 17 hole routings in my drawer. A couple of 19 hole ones too.

[Thomas Dai]

If the game were only 9-holes would we need carts/buggies at all, except for the aged or infirm, even in the hottest climates and severe terrain?
And would courses have half way houses after 4.5 holes?!

atb

[Mike Sweeney]

I have advocated for 12 hole courses in the past.


There is a place for a course with a:

• 3 hole loop - The A Loop
• 6 hole loop - The B Loop
• 9 hole loop - The C Loop

When I was in graduate school, I found every loop you can imagine on Cornell's course Time was busy and you had to find an empty course before class, but this was possible in Ithaca, NY!!


I went to Top Golf this year really wanting to like it, but I did not like it.


I am married to a Broadway aficionado which does not mix well with finding empty golf courses within 100 miles of Broadway. Why is everything so complex!!

[Jay Mickle]

The new par 3,
 9 hole course at Pinehurst (The Cradle) seems to be the real deal. Every time I go by it is packed and people are waiting to play.
In Tom Doak's update to The Confidential Guide Ran gives The Cradle a  "7"

[MCirba]

I’m looking forward to the third topic in your series Mr.Cirba—— “ The Inquisition of counting strokes”.

Damm...now there's a great title.


However, I didn't think of it so it's FAKE NEWS.


 

[Steve Lapper]

Great subject.


I just joined a group of well-known national and regional golf operators to purchase a nearby semi-private course with the goal of immediately taking it fully public and increasing operating efficiencies. It would be described as a Doak 3.5 at best. I joined this deal and invested in it intending to examine it's possibilities for developing residential RE. If viable, the remaining golf available would likely be 12 holes: with two 6 holes loops, or a segregated 9 or 6 hole course.


Sure, the potential profitability of the RE development is nice, but I'm equally excited about conducting an interesting golf experiment in Central NJ. We've done extensive modeling that suggests a 12 and 9 hole course should remain nicely profitable, with a 6 hole version ultimately consigned to the H.O.A shared with the local township and county citizens. If we re-size the maintenance facility and overall staffing, the 6 hole model shows a modest potential profit as well. No question, I would also seek to improve the architecture and fun factors of the surviving holes. This would all be done in stages.


No other facility within a 40 mile radius has a 12 or 9 hole course. let alone a 6 hole one. My partners, long established and highly-respected in the golf industry, are no longer as skeptical as before about the possibility of lesser hole offerings. They are finally embracing of the concept and think this will establish a healthy precedent for similar projects going forward. It is an exciting proposition that I hope to share with everyone here going forward.