[A.G._Crockett]

One of the great pleasures in life is waiting on the tee or on the fairway while the players in front who are teeing-off from tees that are inappropriate for the standard of their game play (sic).
Some other great pleasures in life include hitting drivers and fairway metals on par-3’s and endless fairway metals for second and third etc shots on par-4’s and par-5’s (sic).

Atb

David


If you're standing waiting on players in front do you not think it more likely that the main reasons is because they are basically slow ? As in don't know the etiquette such as be ready to play when it's your turn; leaving bags on the wrong sides of greens; having an elaborate pre-shot routine etc.


And how does a tee become inappropriate for a certain standard of player ? Maybe when the player is presented with a forced carry that they cannot make. But how often do you and I get that on the courses that we play ? Sure you might end up with a higher score playing from tees further back but that is why they have the handicap system.


Niall

Lon leaf is a good golf course, and the tee system is bold an innovative.



Your definition of “forced carries” would seem to omit simply reaching the fairway, or the corner of a dogleg, or clearing a bunker, among other things. That is incredibly simplistic and myopic, and I’m being kind.


Do you ONLY play the tips? Do you insist that others ONLY play the tips?  Would you recommend that children and beginners ONLY play the tips?  What fun that would be for all concerned! FFS…


When you are old, and it becomes drudgery to play the tips, will you then simply quit the game, or will you move up and continue to play this beautiful game that we love?  Will you forego the fresh air, and the birds singing, and the company of good friends, and the color green, and a cold beer after, all because the tips are no longer “appropriate”?


How sad…

[Philippe Binette]

The ego gets in the way.. no matter what...


If I had to run a course, I'd have my regular tee playing at around 6100 yards... but that would be measured from 2 club lengths from the back of the tee box... except on the first hole..
On weekends: 1st hole, the tee markers would be 2-3 yards behind the measurement plate... then every hole (except 1 or 2) would have the markers 10 yards in front of the measurement plate.. so the course would play around 5950 yards

[Niall C]

One of the great pleasures in life is waiting on the tee or on the fairway while the players in front who are teeing-off from tees that are inappropriate for the standard of their game play (sic).
Some other great pleasures in life include hitting drivers and fairway metals on par-3’s and endless fairway metals for second and third etc shots on par-4’s and par-5’s (sic).

Atb

David


If you're standing waiting on players in front do you not think it more likely that the main reasons is because they are basically slow ? As in don't know the etiquette such as be ready to play when it's your turn; leaving bags on the wrong sides of greens; having an elaborate pre-shot routine etc.


And how does a tee become inappropriate for a certain standard of player ? Maybe when the player is presented with a forced carry that they cannot make. But how often do you and I get that on the courses that we play ? Sure you might end up with a higher score playing from tees further back but that is why they have the handicap system.


Niall

Lon leaf is a good golf course, and the tee system is bold an innovative.



Your definition of “forced carries” would seem to omit simply reaching the fairway, or the corner of a dogleg, or clearing a bunker, among other things. That is incredibly simplistic and myopic, and I’m being kind.


Do you ONLY play the tips? Do you insist that others ONLY play the tips?  Would you recommend that children and beginners ONLY play the tips?  What fun that would be for all concerned! FFS…


When you are old, and it becomes drudgery to play the tips, will you then simply quit the game, or will you move up and continue to play this beautiful game that we love?  Will you forego the fresh air, and the birds singing, and the company of good friends, and the color green, and a cold beer after, all because the tips are no longer “appropriate”?


How sad…

AG


Where in my post did I give a definition of "forced carry" ? I've read my post again and can't see it but that may be due to my myopia. In your kindness, perhaps you can help me out.


While you're at it perhaps you could show me where I say I only play from the "tips" and where I suggest others should too.


Many thanks


Niall

[A.G._Crockett]

One of the great pleasures in life is waiting on the tee or on the fairway while the players in front who are teeing-off from tees that are inappropriate for the standard of their game play (sic).
Some other great pleasures in life include hitting drivers and fairway metals on par-3’s and endless fairway metals for second and third etc shots on par-4’s and par-5’s (sic).

Atb

David


If you're standing waiting on players in front do you not think it more likely that the main reasons is because they are basically slow ? As in don't know the etiquette such as be ready to play when it's your turn; leaving bags on the wrong sides of greens; having an elaborate pre-shot routine etc.


And how does a tee become inappropriate for a certain standard of player ? Maybe when the player is presented with a forced carry that they cannot make. But how often do you and I get that on the courses that we play ? Sure you might end up with a higher score playing from tees further back but that is why they have the handicap system.


Niall

Lon leaf is a good golf course, and the tee system is bold an innovative.



Your definition of “forced carries” would seem to omit simply reaching the fairway, or the corner of a dogleg, or clearing a bunker, among other things. That is incredibly simplistic and myopic, and I’m being kind.


Do you ONLY play the tips? Do you insist that others ONLY play the tips?  Would you recommend that children and beginners ONLY play the tips?  What fun that would be for all concerned! FFS…


When you are old, and it becomes drudgery to play the tips, will you then simply quit the game, or will you move up and continue to play this beautiful game that we love?  Will you forego the fresh air, and the birds singing, and the company of good friends, and the color green, and a cold beer after, all because the tips are no longer “appropriate”?


How sad…

AG


Where in my post did I give a definition of "forced carry" ? I've read my post again and can't see it but that may be due to my myopia. In your kindness, perhaps you can help me out.


While you're at it perhaps you could show me where I say I only play from the "tips" and where I suggest others should too.


Many thanks


Niall

The second paragraph of post #23 speaks for itself; you don't need me to help you reread your own stuff, and it won't do any good anyway.

[Thomas Dai]

Making par’s and birdies is enjoyable, it’s fun. Making bogies and doubles and triples and quads because of a screw-up is one thing but making such scores because a hole can’t be physically reached is quite another.
And even with more shots added to a handicap the fun factor diminishes.
Plus if your playing golf in your valuable leisure time and it isn’t fun anymore and it’s maybe costing you a load of money then this may well effect whether you continue to play.
Those of younger years might not appreciate it (yet!) but this is particularly important as you get older or become infirm.
And if a player has a hcp above scratch remember that the course is already too difficult for them so playing from tees that are further back seems as Mr Spock would say ‘illogical’. But then again ego, vanity and logic don’t seem to be easy bedfellows.

Atb

[A.G._Crockett]

Making par’s and birdies is enjoyable, it’s fun. Making bogies and doubles and triples and quads because of a screw-up is one thing but making such scores because a hole can’t be physically reached is quite another.
And even with more shots added to a handicap the fun factor diminishes.
Plus if your playing golf in your valuable leisure time and it isn’t fun anymore and it’s maybe costing you a load of money then this may well effect whether you continue to play.
Those of younger years might not appreciate it (yet!) but this is particularly important as you get older or become infirm.
And if a player has a hcp above scratch remember that the course is already too difficult for them so playing from tees that are further back seems as Mr Spock would say ‘illogical’. But then again ego, vanity and logic don’t seem to be easy bedfellows.

Atb

Excellent; thank you!

[Niall C]

And how does a tee become inappropriate for a certain standard of player ? Maybe when the player is presented with a forced carry that they cannot make. But how often do you and I get that on the courses that we play ? Sure you might end up with a higher score playing from tees further back but that is why they have the handicap system.

AG


For ease of reference the second para of post #23 outlined above. Please show me where I define what a forced carry is ? Once you've managed that conjuring trick then maybe you can also tell me where I suggested I played only from the "tips" and that others should do so too.


Niall

[Tim Martin]

And how does a tee become inappropriate for a certain standard of player ? Maybe when the player is presented with a forced carry that they cannot make. But how often do you and I get that on the courses that we play ? Sure you might end up with a higher score playing from tees further back but that is why they have the handicap system.

AG


For ease of reference the second para of post #23 outlined above. Please show me where I define what a forced carry is ? Once you've managed that conjuring trick then maybe you can also tell me where I suggested I played only from the "tips" and that others should do so too.


Niall

Niall-I read your post the same way A.G. did. Seems that you advocate for players to go to the back tees and then apply their handicap. Why not have players pick the tees they are comfortable with?

[Niall C]

Making par’s and birdies is enjoyable, it’s fun. Making bogies and doubles and triples and quads because of a screw-up is one thing but making such scores because a hole can’t be physically reached is quite another.
And even with more shots added to a handicap the fun factor diminishes.
Plus if your playing golf in your valuable leisure time and it isn’t fun anymore and it’s maybe costing you a load of money then this may well effect whether you continue to play.
Those of younger years might not appreciate it (yet!) but this is particularly important as you get older or become infirm.
And if a player has a hcp above scratch remember that the course is already too difficult for them so playing from tees that are further back seems as Mr Spock would say ‘illogical’. But then again ego, vanity and logic don’t seem to be easy bedfellows.

Atb

I wonder, what is more vain, continuing to play from the same tees as you get older and can't hit the ball as far, or moving to forward tees so you can still get your "regulation par" ?


David


You and I play our golf in the UK which basically means we probably play most of our golf on courses that were laid out pre-WWII and indeed WWI. In other words they were designed or redesigned by golden age GCA's. Those guys designed courses that were designed to be playable and fun for all. They generally achieved that by utilising flanking hazards and providing an alternative route for the weaker player so that they could tack round trouble or take it on as they wished. In other words the player has a choice. Generally there was an absence of forced carry.


Let me define forced carry for AG's benefit. A forced carry is a carry that can't be avoided. There is no alternative route for the weaker player and he/she simply has to take it on. As I said by and large forced carries were kept to a minimum.


Now consider that the vast majority of UK golfers don't ride in golf carts but instead walk. So what you are suggesting is that when the older/weaker/juvenile player comes off the green to go to the next tee, which is often fairly adjacent, and they aren't confronted by a forced carry, that instead of teeing it up there that they walk half way down the hole to tee it up so they have a better chance of a par ? Tell me, did you do that with Bill when he was growing up ?


Niall


 

[Erik J. Barzeski]

🤦🏼‍♂️

[Niall C]

Niall-I read your post the same way A.G. did. Seems that you advocate for players to go to the back tees and then apply their handicap. Why not have players pick the tees they are comfortable with?

Tim


Fair enough, you've inferred it (and maybe AG did but won't admit it) but it wasn't something I said, not that it matters much.


My objection to this whole notion of move forward is two-fold. Firstly the idea that a player would walk a large proportion of the course without playing it is simply absurd. Particularly if it is so that they can play to "par".


The second issue I have is the notion that the scratch golfer and the hacker can't play off the same tee and both find it fun and challenging. That's not being said but that's what I think's implied. It's like the GCA can't be arsed to design a hole that works with the different standard of player playing from the same tee but instead sticks in numerous tee boxes. I wonder if it isn't just a crutch for shite architecture.


Niall

[Tim Martin]

Niall-I read your post the same way A.G. did. Seems that you advocate for players to go to the back tees and then apply their handicap. Why not have players pick the tees they are comfortable with?

Tim


Fair enough, you've inferred it (and maybe AG did but won't admit it) but it wasn't something I said, not that it matters much.


My objection to this whole notion of move forward is two-fold. Firstly the idea that a player would walk a large proportion of the course without playing it is simply absurd. Particularly if it is so that they can play to "par".


The second issue I have is the notion that the scratch golfer and the hacker can't play off the same tee and both find it fun and challenging. That's not being said but that's what I think's implied. It's like the GCA can't be arsed to design a hole that works with the different standard of player playing from the same tee but instead sticks in numerous tee boxes. I wonder if it isn't just a crutch for shite architecture.


Niall

Niall-Should the lesser player hit driver and fairway wood into almost every par four if there is an option? I don’t think the notion of moving up is necessarily to shoot par but rather to enjoy the trip around.

[Joe Hancock]

I grew up playing a course that had two sets of tees….you played from one or the other. No one complained, you were learning to improve as you enjoyed more rounds of golf. Sometimes I wonder why we make so many issues for ourselves, as humans (let alone trying to fix imaginary problems of other humans).

[Peter Sayegh]

I grew up playing a course that had two sets of tees….you played from one or the other. No one complained, you were learning to improve as you enjoyed more rounds of golf. Sometimes I wonder why we make so many issues for ourselves, as humans (let alone trying to fix imaginary problems of other humans).

I haven't played the same tees on consecutive visits to any course in the last ten years (thanks to GCA).

Before I turned 35, it was the tips. (As Broadway Joe once said, "if you're not going all the way, why go at all?").

Multiple (established) teeing options have increased my enjoyment immensely.
I doubt there's any better way to reveal a course's greatness/enjoyment than to play it from alternate teeing grounds.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

So beginners and weaker golfers should play from shorter tees?

Yes. They absolutely should.

It's simply not fun for someone whose driver goes 70 yards in the air (like my daughter when she first started playing) to tee it up on a par four where it's 180 yards to the fairway.

Why not simply design the hole in such a way that it is interesting for both the tiger and the rabbit playing off the same tee.

What's interesting about having 180 yards to the fairway… what's interesting about needing eight shots to get to the green?

You're surely having a laugh ? You can't get your head round players of different abilities being able to play from the same tee and still have fun and find the golf interesting? Seriously?

He might be laughing (at your post), but he's not having a laugh.

I can fully understand that Erik and AG aren't able to get it but you're a GCA ffs. What kind of holes have you been designing all your career ? 

Niall, I suggest it is you who "doesn't get it" on this one.

We have different tees for a valid and good reason, and the handicap system you touted (IIRC) supports play from different tees.

I love how people will (rightfully) bemoan players playing from too far back for their ability level… and then Niall, you come in and basically say "everyone just play one set of tees." One size doesn't fit all.

[Ira Fishman]

Niall,


Further to Erik and A.G., I am having a difficult time understanding your point. When we were in the Highlands a few years ago, we fulfilled my dream of playing RD. I played from the Yellows (although our next visit will be from the Reds), and my wife played from the Greens. Next year we hope to return to Ireland. We are skipping Portrush and RCD because there are not a set of tees that my wife will enjoy.


So I guess by your definition of good architecture, RD got it wrong and Portrush and RCD got it right? Or maybe the other way around?


Ira

[Tim Leahy]

When my dad was in his late 70's and only carried his driver about 125 yds I gently encouraged him to play the red tees by calling them the Super Senior tees. He enjoyed the game more and eventually started calling the red tees the Super Senior tees also. He played for another ten years before his hips didn't allow him to play anymore but I feel he wouldn't have enjoyed it if he didn't move up to the tees that fit his game.

[Peter Pallotta]

I think firm-dry and running fairways and open-fronted and at-grade greens change everything -- the rare type of course & conditions where the low swing speed player benefits disproportionately more than the high swing speed player. In that context I can easily understand why one/two sets of tees were, for decades, considered sufficient.

[Ken Moum]

I think firm-dry and running fairways and open-fronted and at-grade greens change everything -- the rare type of course & conditions where the low swing speed player benefits disproportionately more than the high swing speed player. In that context I can easily understand why one/two sets of tees were, for decades, considered sufficient.

You nailed it. In fact, Alice Dye's preaching on this subject focused in irrigated fairways as being the thing that hurt women the most.


I'm a short hitter with a tendency to hit it low,  so a fast course that lets me bounce it on at least some greens gives me a chance to succeed.


Otherwise I need to play a really, really short course.

[Joe Hancock]

So, someone just tell me how I’m supposed to think and feel about this; are we to have tees available for everyone, regardless of experience, age or ability, to be able to reach every hole on regulation? Is that what the end goal is? Or is there some common sense limit to this, that has to further be defined because it’s not really common sense but rather a matter of opinion?

[Steve Lang]

    Joe,


I played Longleaf back in the 90's and we sometimes played "Knockback," if you par you go back one tee, bogey stay where you are, double bogey move up a tee... winner is who's farthest back at end of first round... of course we sometimes got mixed up when drinking too much with all those tees, but in the end after considering the usual gaming.. found where a happy medium was for the second 18...  is this a design to be copied?  Did Dan Maples do it again??  Maybe someone can answer that... who's more interested

[Ken Moum]

So, someone just tell me how I’m supposed to think and feel about this; are we to have tees available for everyone, regardless of experience, age or ability, to be able to reach every hole on regulation?

As an advocate of short tees, I don't think so. In fact, I'd rather see a course with some unreachable holes and some drive-and-pitch holes. Elie comes to mind.


Barring a course that's much too long, the worst thing is seeing a procession of ~375-yard holes...wedges for the longer hitter and driver fairway wood for me.


Re. the number of tees, what would be wrong with sets at 4500, 5800 and 6800 with combos at 5300 and 6300?


Those numbers are completely arbitrary of course, but you get the idea.

[A.G._Crockett]

To turn this to GCA for a moment, consider this:


A par 4 doglegs right, and a deep fairway bunker guards the inside of the dogleg. While there is fairway to the left, it quickly runs out, and there is a side slope of heavy rough when it does.  Plus, from the left, the green is guarded by a very difficult green side bunker, AND the player would be hitting toward water on the right side of the green.


Putting aside beginners, small children, living fossils, and others who struggle with getting the ball airborne, just consider “average” golfers who hit the ball varying distances.


The “intent” of the GCA is for the player to play as close to the bunker as possible, or to take it on directly and try to carry it; it is a great risk-reward tee shot, but ONLY if you are playing from a set of tees that brings the bunker fully into play.  If a golfer is playing from so far back that the bunker isn’t reachable off the tee, then I think you could make the case that he is NOT playing the course the way the GCA intended.


This is, btw, a real hole on a real golf course, the 9th at UNC-Finley, and it is a great hole at that. But EVERY golf course has multiple versions of this; risk reward par 5’s, short par 4’s, and so on. 


If you believe others should play a course that is so long that they don’t have decisions to make, and can’t interact with the design features that the GCA crafted for your enjoyment, then perhaps a GCA forum is the wrong place for you.

[Jeff_Brauer]

So, someone just tell me how I’m supposed to think and feel about this; are we to have tees available for everyone, regardless of experience, age or ability, to be able to reach every hole on regulation? Is that what the end goal is? Or is there some common sense limit to this, that has to further be defined because it’s not really common sense but rather a matter of opinion?

I hate to tell anyone how to think......including any golfer who wants to enjoy the game their way, by telling them to go tee up at the back or somewhere.  What other businesses would tell 10-25% of their customers "You'll take what we give you and enjoy it!"


I suppose the ultimate is allowing every golfer to hit at least most greens if they hit good shots, and with something less than a driver and 3 wood for fun and variety, so they can enjoy golf the way it was meant to be played.  Pars, birdies, and greens in regulation are fun.  As I described elsewhere, that usually takes a course length of no more than 28-29X tee shot distance, with 30+X drive distance being the outer limit of a18 potential GIR.


And, why not?  When looking at the topography, I used to feel okay if I got 13 or so holes reachable by the "average length drivers" of the 5 or 6 tee lengths that typically fall out in distance surveys.  I can tell you, that angered many women (why not all 18?)  Every hole is at least a partially unique design problem.


Do better male players really lose any of their quality of golf experience because gradually, courses have put additional tees in that let players enjoy (and let's face it, pay for) golf? Is that too much to give up for you to enjoy golf?  Ironically, the best way I had to sell another set of tees more forward was to note that if shorter hitters played faster by eliminating 9-10 shots, everyone behind them would play faster, too.  So, think of the forward tees as being for your benefit, if you must, LOL.


As to other comments on "why not design a hole that challenges everyone?"  Actually, in one way, splitting tees by 25-30 yards to bring everyone to the same landing zone for good tee shots is easiest.  At least one set of hazards serves all tee shots, but then you give everyone the same approach, and as Ken notes, it can be from wedge to fw wood.  Splitting tees for proportional tee length often results in anticipated LZ's for shorter hitters being further down the fw than for the back tee players.  If you are lucky, a side fw bunker for the back tees might be a carry bunker for the forward tee player, but every hole is different.  So, I agree, talking just of tees is really only half the solution to trying to design for the enjoyment of many skill levels.


For most profit oriented (or struggle to break even)courses, placing expensive sand hazards all down the fw to challenge everyone really isn't financially practical.  Carefully considering the design for all levels of players, assuming they play the "correct" (or at least statistically favored) tee length is no easy design task.  And, frankly, throughout American golf history, most gca's probably ended up defaulting by designing mostly for low handicap men, and at best accommodating others.  Again, I have a hard time seeing how really designing for those who play courses the most often is a bad thing, but maybe someone else can tell me how I am supposed to feel, LOL.

[Sean_A]

Niall,


Further to Erik and A.G., I am having a difficult time understanding your point. When we were in the Highlands a few years ago, we fulfilled my dream of playing RD. I played from the Yellows (although our next visit will be from the Reds), and my wife played from the Greens. Next year we hope to return to Ireland. We are skipping Portrush and RCD because there are not a set of tees that my wife will enjoy.


So I guess by your definition of good architecture, RD got it wrong and Portrush and RCD got it right? Or maybe the other way around?


Ira

Hell, I often think the same as Niall when I see markers plonked miles up the fairway. I can't imagine as kids any of my mates would have walked forward. We would have hit shots to those miles forward tees. And if they weren't placed with any meaning or intent we would have blown past them and thought those who did a dead walk to those tees were suckers. What is the point of a dead walk? But of course, our parents had the good sense to start us on ability appropriate courses such as par 3s and executive courses. This business of trying to retrofit a full length course to beginners is far from ideal. You know what was ideal? Par 3s and executive courses. Let's hope their popularity continues to rise. Golf really needs more specifically designed courses. Hell, we do it for pros, why not for others?  I have never liked the mythical course designed for everyone concept. It kills walking and that is not something archies should get behind.

Ciao

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()