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.


Ally Mcintosh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: If the nines are imbalanced (in length), which do you prefer harder?
« Reply #25 on: January 02, 2018, 08:44:02 AM »
Completely agree with Tom.


In my case, we have a one-off resequencing necessitated by the addition of a few holes. Both options provide a more natural flow than the previous sequence (in terms of shorter green to tee walks and no crossovers) but I still have the choice of which nine is better first and which second. And I have the slight concern of long fours on one nine and short fours on t'other.


Flow is king. Other than that, there should be no rules. All decisions come down to the intuition of the architect.

Jason Topp

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: If the nines are imbalanced (in length), which do you prefer harder?
« Reply #26 on: January 02, 2018, 12:01:09 PM »
I do not know if pace of play will be a factor in your equation but one busy resort course in Minnesota flipped its 9's and supposedly cut off 30 minutes in the time it took to play the course.  A course in Tucson did the same thing.  In both courses the longer more difficult 9 was switched from the back to the front.

Forrest Richardson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: If the nines are imbalanced (in length), which do you prefer harder?
« Reply #27 on: January 02, 2018, 03:12:00 PM »
This is really a question that has to do with pace of play. Scoring and handicapping can handle inequities in difficulty, but only PACE and FLOW variables can manage the time it takes to play. This is important if the 18-holes are to be used interchangeably where players are set out on opposing nines with an expectation to meet magically at roughly the same time to swap nines. So, it really does not matter provided the set-up of different nines with different PACE RATINGS can be adjusted.

If I were to answer directly — from a play perspective — I would vote for a more difficult front nine as this is generally when the player has more energy and zest. Plus, there may be less risk taking on the outbound holes, whereas coming back home — with more shots under one's belt — there is apt to be a bit more "go for it" mentality. "Easier" tends to go hand in hand with gambling. More difficulty tends to bring out caution and restraint.
« Last Edit: January 02, 2018, 03:13:57 PM by Forrest Richardson »
— Forrest Richardson, Golf Course Architect/ASGCA
    www.golfgroupltd.com
    www.golframes.com

Ally Mcintosh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: If the nines are imbalanced (in length), which do you prefer harder?
« Reply #28 on: January 02, 2018, 04:07:23 PM »
Interesting that the more recent comments seem to be veering towards the shorter nine on the back. I also like that idea but it certainly gives the less interesting finish and an 18th green slightly removed from the clubhouse window.


Many things still to ponder before I present my recommendation.


Thanks

Forrest Richardson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: If the nines are imbalanced (in length), which do you prefer harder?
« Reply #29 on: January 02, 2018, 05:41:41 PM »
Just build a new clubhouse :)
— Forrest Richardson, Golf Course Architect/ASGCA
    www.golfgroupltd.com
    www.golframes.com