tee time intervals

[Mark Molyneux]

Seems that discussion of optimal tee time intervals usually ends up with somebody decrying 8-minute slots on the tee sheet and other people advocating 10, 11 or 12-minute slots but my question is, "Is there a best opening sequence of holes?" My thought is that the worst opener at a busy public course might just be the reachable-in-two par 5. It's pretty easy to conceptualize a bunch of shot sequences that lead to 3 or even 4 groups on that hole takes several more holes to sort it all out. Another problematic start would be the beefy (200 yards+) one-shotter because the forward group tees off, goes to find their balls, maybe 3 of 4 guys have to hit a second shot from fairway, rough or sand. Hopefully, the foursome is on the green in less than 10 shots. Do they wave up the group waiting on the tee? More often not so we stare at them as they take 8, 9, 10 or more putts.


For flow of play, my preference would be a "friendly handshake" of a par 4, followed by a medium length par 3, followed by a medium length par 5.


Are there feelings about how to start a golf course routing to help players keep a reasonable pace at a busy facility?

[Kalen Braley]

Mark,

Imagine two short par 5s to open a golf course, and yes you would be correct, gets the day off to a super slow start.  Wasn't uncommon to take 40-45 minutes to get to the 3rd tee. This is the one glaring weakness of Indian Canyon in Spokane, WA.

[Peter Flory]

I always think of the breakfast ball issue.  i.e. what hole would generate the fewest.  If you rule a par 3 out for the opener, then I think that it is the gentle handshake par 4.  Players aren't swinging out of their shoes and a marginal drive is OK.


1 on Streamsong Blue is a pretty nice one.


When the opening hole is a par 5 or a difficult par 4, hitting a great drive is much better than hitting a marginal one and people can't resist the temptation to try to do better.  Once the first guy does it, then it gives everyone else the green light.  And they don't want to lose a ball on the first shot, so they do the hard search.

[Thomas Dai]

I’ve long thought that par-3’s and par-5’s when sequenced back-to-back have a propensity to lead to hold-ups in play.
As to tee-time interval spacings see this thread from a few weeks ago - https://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,70530.msg1696150.html#msg1696150
Atb

[David_Tepper]

There have been several studies of pace of play issues. Here is a link to some of them:

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=study+of+golf+course+pace+of+play

I recall one study that said the worst way to start a course for pace of play was a par-5 followed by a par-3. I can think of 2 courses in the Bay Area that start that way. 
 

[Mark_Fine]

Out of Time, the book by my good friend the late Bill Yates is a great read.  Bill was the expert on pace of play. 

[Mark Molyneux]

Thank you all and particularly Mark Fine, who just sold me the last copy of Bill Yates' book off Amazon!

[David_Tepper]

Mark & Mark -

I am pretty sure it was Mr. Yates who concluded that starting a course with a par-5 followed by a par-3 was a bad formula for pace of play.   


DT

[JohnVDB]

Out of Time, the book by my good friend the late Bill Yates is a great read.  Bill was the expert on pace of play.

 I’ll was a great guy and his book is the Bible on this topic.

[David_Tepper]

A 69-page paper by Bill Yates on pace of play from 2008:

https://www.golfleaguetracker.com/glthome/fileshare/pace-of-play-by-bill-yates.pdf

[Jeff_Brauer]

"Experts" do agree that a 5-3 combo is pretty bad, but a true 3 shotter where they won't wait to reach in 2 isn't too bad.  In fact, if it takes longer to play ahead of a par 3, it can help pace.  At most courses, there are true 3 shotters for all but a handful of players.


Any hard hole that plays slower just ahead of a par 3 is good at reducing the par 3 back up.  An easy hole following a par 3 helps get players going, too. 


I think it was Yates who wrote that for pace of play, the idea course would have 18 similarly difficult par 4 holes.  And, when you think about it, having the hardest hole on the course as the first and each hole getting just a bit easier would be the way to spread out play.   If the first hole takes 7 minutes to play, and the second 6.75, the third 6.5, etc., the trailing groups would never catch up!

[Kyle Harris]

I always think of the breakfast ball issue.  i.e. what hole would generate the fewest.  If you rule a par 3 out for the opener, then I think that it is the gentle handshake par 4.  Players aren't swinging out of their shoes and a marginal drive is OK.


1 on Streamsong Blue is a pretty nice one.

I see eight of the first four balls in that fairway fairly frequently.

[Anthony Gray]

 The course I got kicked out of had a reachable par 5 opener with OB on each side. It was molasses on the first tee on the weekend.

[Peter Flory]

I see eight of the first four balls in that fairway fairly frequently.

There is no snuffing it out completely.  On that hole, at least they are easy to collect.  To be fair, it is a really fun tee shot and I wouldn't mind hitting a full bucket from there.