Too many tee boxes?

[Sean_A]

For Sedge Valley, some holes have five tees and some have just two, but I think it has been decided that we will only have two sets of tee markers for daily play.  The greenskeepers are the happiest people with this result.  Trying to put out five different sets of markers every day is a grind.

This is what I mean. Nothing wrong with loads of tees especially if there are natural sites and offer a variety of angles. But only three sets out with a few combos. However, ultimately, I think it is best to design more specifically for demographics.

Ciao

[Craig Sweet]

I like playing from 6100-6400 yards. This allows me to reach par 4's with two shots, even if it means hitting a five wood second shot. 

[Sam Kestin]

I would like to see no tee markers but seems that I am in the minority.

I join your minority opinion, Paul!


I love the "dealer's choice" element to the absence of tee markers.

[Ally Mcintosh]

For Sedge Valley, some holes have five tees and some have just two, but I think it has been decided that we will only have two sets of tee markers for daily play.  The greenskeepers are the happiest people with this result.  Trying to put out five different sets of markers every day is a grind.

This is what I mean. Nothing wrong with loads of tees especially if there are natural sites and offer a variety of angles. But only three sets out with a few combos. However, ultimately, I think it is best to design more specifically for demographics.

Ciao

Loads of tees only work if the aesthetic of the course is all short grass and the tees are so expertly built that they are completely hidden from the eye. Think The Loop.


Otherwise don’t build loads of tees if they’re not going to be used. Because - generally speaking - loads of tees are fussy and ugly.

[Sean_A]

For Sedge Valley, some holes have five tees and some have just two, but I think it has been decided that we will only have two sets of tee markers for daily play.  The greenskeepers are the happiest people with this result.  Trying to put out five different sets of markers every day is a grind.

This is what I mean. Nothing wrong with loads of tees especially if there are natural sites and offer a variety of angles. But only three sets out with a few combos. However, ultimately, I think it is best to design more specifically for demographics.

Ciao

Loads of tees only work if the aesthetic of the course is all short grass and the tees are so expertly built that they are completely hidden from the eye. Think The Loop.


Otherwise don’t build loads of tees if they’re not going to be used. Because - generally speaking - loads of tees are fussy and ugly.

Or links with natural tee sites spread in dunes. Burnham is a great example and one of best features of the course. Tourists don't talk about it because they don't realize.

Ciao

[Ally Mcintosh]

Yes, it can be quite easy to hide tees in good linksland. In fact, I find positioning and building tees to be - strangely - one of the most satisfying parts of the whole process.


However, even perfectly hidden tees come with extra access paths and often signage. Gotta get the public round.


So generally, more tees equal more clutter.


I am sure Tom has built more tees on some holes at Sedge Valley to provide playing options. But I’m also sure he wouldn’t build them unless they were completely unobtrusive or - perhaps - that they were needed because the size of them necessitated more area to spread wear.

[Sean_A]

Yes, there are some natural paths leading to alternate tees at Burnham. Very small price to pay for the huge variety. I am in favour of less clutter, but creating widely different options which opens up angles on a narrow links is not something I associate with clutter. It's good design.

Ciao

[Thomas Dai]

Some questions/considerations to throw into the mix.
Do super forward tees, super back ones too, really need to be anything other than small and level and do they need to be even irrigated? Their usage is likely to be very limited and given the ego nature of super-backs they probably shouldn’t even have the markers on them very often, like only for elite or super-elite competitions.
And then there’s the maintenance question. Mowing is time consuming and irrigation is expensive. Indeed to what extent is irrigation really needed on rarely used tees, you’re hitting off a tee-peg not directly off the grass! And maintenance isn’t just the tees themselves but the pathways as well and at some places, horrible thought, the pathways are irrigated too.
Atb

[Mark_Fine]

Adding more tees (I am talking about more forward tees) whether they are formal or informal, I can tell you from multiple experiences on my projects, is one of the best things that can be done to make the game more fun/attract more golfers.  I am not talking about ladies tees (I never use that terminology), I am talking about shorter distance tees for anyone who wants to play there.  Ideally they should all be rated as well for all so everyone feels comfortable playing from them.  On some of our courses, we have even been adding tees (some formal and informal) where an 18 hole championship course can play (on certain days/afternoons, etc) as an 18 hole par three course.  It’s fun and different and golfers are starting to love it. 


Change takes time, just like getting golfers who think they should be playing at 6000 yards to play at 5500 or 5000 or even less. 

[Ally Mcintosh]

Mark, I’m cool with 4,000 yard tees but prefer it when pegs are just thrown down in the fairway. Formal tees that far in front are difficult to keep out of the eye-line from further back….. but I agree they add fun and can be needed.

[A.G._Crockett]

Paul,


I agree.  In most cases, the pro will use the shorter tee on long holes and the longer tee on short holes, leading to far too similar hole lengths.  I don't know who the gca you are referring to is, but I tend to agree.  We don't tend to get into the creation of blended tees, and I always preferred at least 5 physical tees (with some combined, and in other cases due to topo, there may be 6 or7 tee pods, with two nominally devoted to the main tee, etc.).  I think most of us would probably add a fee to the master plan for studying that, LOL.  It could really take several days of deep thought to really make those good.

Jeff,I agree with you about the formulaic approach to hybrid tees being undesirable, as so many formulaic things are. 

At age 70, I play LOTS of hybrid sets in tournament play, and I'm always appreciative of clubs that have clearly put a lot of thought into which tees are up and which are back. 

I think there are two key factors in this that are often overlooked.  One is for the club/course to think hard about the demographic that will be playing the hybrid set and what that means on holes with forced carries, etc.  But the other much more subtle, factor is to look at the hole and try to figure out if it can be played from a forward tee and still pose the architectural challenges to shorter hitters that it does from the longer tee.  That takes a lot of study and intent, IMO, and a lot of courses just don't do it.  They either look to split the yardages in half, or they play all the 4's up and all the 3's and 5's back, or something simple (but not very good).