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.


Charlie Goerges

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Modern Tee Systems and The Lido
« Reply #50 on: August 16, 2023, 06:09:20 PM »
I think you missed the rest of my sentence because of the small text, I’ve since upsized it.
Severally on the occasion of everything that thou doest, pause and ask thyself, if death is a dreadful thing because it deprives thee of this. - Marcus Aurelius

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Modern Tee Systems and The Lido
« Reply #51 on: August 16, 2023, 06:12:57 PM »
Tim,


Statistically, the 140-150 hitters probably need under 4000 yards to reach all greens with good shots, but women resist the 1000's barrier similar to the way men do (or did, my father wouldn't play under 6,000 yards) and in my experience, tend to be happy at about 4500 yards, where perhaps 12-14 greens can be reached in regulation with their good shots.


Also, most men should probably play under 6,000 yards by that same standard, but they still prefer to play around 6,300, as they have for decades.


As you say, no one is forcing anyone to play anywhere, but the golf industry is certainly encouraging nearly everyone to move up somewhat.
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

jeffwarne

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Modern Tee Systems and The Lido
« Reply #52 on: August 17, 2023, 12:32:21 AM »
I give many playing lessons to women who hit the ball 100-150 yards.
Although we are a walking course, I usually give playing lessons in a cart for options an mobility.
Last week, we had no carts due to 6 inches of rain in 4 days, and I carried a woman's bag for her.
The thing about a 4500 yard course is, especially a modern one, is the absurd distances between holes.
When terrain allows, wouldn't you just prefer to play the occasional extra shot rather than traipsing 60-70 yards from every green, then another 100-150 yards forward ON EVERY hole.
I found this to be incredibly unpleasant, often walking farther to the tee, than the length of the remaining hole.


Of course there are many holes where this isn't practical due to landforms/forced carries or unturfed areas, but one of the main reasons I pine for a rollback is to reduce the distances between tees(and the need for so many sets).
Once upon a time a 6700 yard course was a test for elites,6300 in the middle, while 5700 was deemed navigable for the shortest of hitters.
Sure they hit a lot more woods and long irons than players expect to now, but I'm just not sure walking a lot more and playing a lot less golf is all that great. I've never really understood why a player getting two shots a hole should expect to have a short iron into a green in regulation.
I'd rather play over terrain than walk over it-when practical.
This is/was often solved by having different pars for women.


Of course I'm a zealot and there is surely some middle ground, but the idea of so may tees seems so unsocial, with players, regardless of ability, expecting custom tees built just for them.
We used to call those fairways.


I guess there's no harm in multiple tees, it's just the expectation and demands for multiple combo tees(complete with scorecards and ratings) that irk me.
"Let's slow the damned greens down a bit, not take the character out of them." Tom Doak
"Take their focus off the grass and put it squarely on interesting golf." Don Mahaffey

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Modern Tee Systems and The Lido
« Reply #53 on: August 17, 2023, 01:48:42 AM »
I agree about forward tees being a huge transition and just encouraging people to ride. Same for going back. Mega tees aren't the answer if walking is part of the equation. Courses need to be built with a bit tighter demographic in mind. One size fits all stuff is a fantasy.

Ciao
New plays planned for 2024: Nothing

Thomas Dai

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Modern Tee Systems and The Lido
« Reply #54 on: August 17, 2023, 04:29:39 AM »
One set of tees, forward ones, sounds good. Oh, and different spec golf balls that go different distances, ie rolled-back ball for long hitters, positive/plus distance ball for lessor players?
Whoops best not go there. See multiple other threads.
:):):)
atb

Mark_Fine

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Modern Tee Systems and The Lido
« Reply #55 on: August 17, 2023, 06:01:20 AM »
At my home club we are finally preparing to add a whole series of shorter tees (low profile and thoughtfully placed) and 95% of the players who play the forward tees are raving about it.  Many of those raving are saying it is about time someone looked at the game from someone else’s perspective (most decision makers are not forward tee players  ;) ). Of course there are a few in that 5% that think they are making the course too easy.  What those don’t seem to realize is they can still play any tees they want almost any time they want except in a hand full of competitions where starting locations are dictated. 


Years ago, almost the only new tees I was ever asked to add were back tees to make the course longer and more challenging.  And sadly those new tees generally were only going to be used by a handful of golfers and/or on rare occasions for a big tournament.  Sometimes they were wanted only for “card yardage” for rating or ranking purposes.  Now I rarely get that request and it is more about adding shorter tees that help make the golf course more interesting AND enjoyable for more golfers. 


Most forward tee players don’t mind walking forward an extra distance to get to their tee.  Those that don’t are in some ways no different than those back tee players who hate walking an extra 50 or 100 yards backwards to get to their tee. 


I like skiing and golf comparisons because there are no two golf or ski resorts alike and both skiers and golfers have to navigate their way down each slope or through each hole differently depending on where they start, their abilities, the conditions, etc. If they both start from the wrong spot if can be very unenjoyable. 


We all play golf for different reasons but no one would play golf if it is was not fun.  The definition of fun is relative  ;)

John Challenger

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Modern Tee Systems and The Lido
« Reply #56 on: August 17, 2023, 06:24:17 AM »
I think that I've probably played the majority of my rounds over the last decade at 6300-6600 yards. It seems too confining but I was somehow convinced the shorter tees were for juniors/women/seniors. The stones would make the game too hard or too slow. Most of this thread has focused on the virtues or sins of having more short tee locations, yet the industry is consumed by trying to make old and new courses longer, i.e. finding tees that are longer than a course's current "stones tees." The traditionalists here want new players and short hitters to play a game of golf hitting driver/5-wood, driver/5-iron, driver/3-wood on every hole. These are the hardest clubs in the bag to hit. And we want to encourage new players...At the same time, the longest hitters/pros are playing driver/wedge on every hole. The game is upside-down.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2023, 06:30:41 AM by John Challenger »

Thomas Dai

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Modern Tee Systems and The Lido
« Reply #57 on: August 17, 2023, 08:01:41 AM »
Golf takes up a lot of space and uses a lot of resources, especially water.
The further the ball goes the longer the course needed and the more acreage required for 18-holes.
And all the time more and more of this attitude towards the game seem to be appearing - https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/london-land-golf-housing-b1100769.html
Golf needs to be bloody careful when it comes to its image and place in society and things like back tees and longer holes and all must be green and manicured ain't helping.
Rollback and rollback soon has never been more necessary.
atb
« Last Edit: August 17, 2023, 08:04:09 AM by Thomas Dai »

Charlie Goerges

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Modern Tee Systems and The Lido
« Reply #58 on: August 17, 2023, 09:17:47 AM »
I give many playing lessons to women who hit the ball 100-150 yards.
Although we are a walking course, I usually give playing lessons in a cart for options an mobility.
Last week, we had no carts due to 6 inches of rain in 4 days, and I carried a woman's bag for her.
The thing about a 4500 yard course is, especially a modern one, is the absurd distances between holes.
When terrain allows, wouldn't you just prefer to play the occasional extra shot rather than traipsing 60-70 yards from every green, then another 100-150 yards forward ON EVERY hole.
I found this to be incredibly unpleasant, often walking farther to the tee, than the length of the remaining hole.


Of course there are many holes where this isn't practical due to landforms/forced carries or unturfed areas, but one of the main reasons I pine for a rollback is to reduce the distances between tees(and the need for so many sets).
Once upon a time a 6700 yard course was a test for elites,6300 in the middle, while 5700 was deemed navigable for the shortest of hitters.
Sure they hit a lot more woods and long irons than players expect to now, but I'm just not sure walking a lot more and playing a lot less golf is all that great. I've never really understood why a player getting two shots a hole should expect to have a short iron into a green in regulation.
I'd rather play over terrain than walk over it-when practical.
This is/was often solved by having different pars for women.


Of course I'm a zealot and there is surely some middle ground, but the idea of so may tees seems so unsocial, with players, regardless of ability, expecting custom tees built just for them.
We used to call those fairways.


I guess there's no harm in multiple tees, it's just the expectation and demands for multiple combo tees(complete with scorecards and ratings) that irk me.




A good and thoughtful response. I can't address everything, but I agree that I would also rather hit the occasional extra shot than walk an extra 150 yards. I just feel like for some players, it wouldn't only be occasional. When I was a teenager, I worked at the course and my boss for a couple of seasons was an old retired lady. Her rounds were like I'd described (a neverending succession of 5-woods). When our course put in a new set of front tees that shortened the course by over a thousand yards, she started using them immediately. I wasn't thoughtful or curious enough to ask her why or her thoughts at the time, but the preference seemed clear. The extra walk didn't probably matter to her as she was often riding a cart.


I guess my point is to try to get people to think about these other perspectives. Like I said, I'm on the side of fewer tees, but it's an easy choice to narrow it down to tees that are good for oneself without much thought for others.
Severally on the occasion of everything that thou doest, pause and ask thyself, if death is a dreadful thing because it deprives thee of this. - Marcus Aurelius

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Modern Tee Systems and The Lido
« Reply #59 on: August 17, 2023, 10:50:01 AM »
I agree with whoever said that perhaps we should segment golf courses more, rather than 1 size fits all.  The latest data from various sources show 91% of men prefer to play 6300 yards or less.  8.5% prefer 6600 or so (down in length over a decade where about 16% wanted to play at about 6800 yards.)  0.5% prefer over 7,000 yards, and yet, since perhaps 1951, we have all sought that +7000 yards (and longer).  I will say that Fazio more than most built more courses that maxed out at 6800 or so.


I have heard of a few courses taking out back tees and turning them into community gardens or parks, where the land and land plan allows.  Maybe there should be more.  I think most keep natives from the very back tee to the fw to minimized the extra acres of green grass. 



To paraphrase Winston Churchhill, "Never has so much golf course been built for so few."
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Charlie Goerges

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Modern Tee Systems and The Lido
« Reply #60 on: August 17, 2023, 10:51:37 AM »
Courses need to be built with a bit tighter demographic in mind. One size fits all stuff is a fantasy.




I'm curious what this would mean. Should someone be building a 4200-yard Ballyneal/Sand Hills/Dismal clone and a 4200-yard Oakland Hills clone etc?
Severally on the occasion of everything that thou doest, pause and ask thyself, if death is a dreadful thing because it deprives thee of this. - Marcus Aurelius

Adam Lawrence

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Modern Tee Systems and The Lido
« Reply #61 on: August 17, 2023, 11:01:43 AM »
)

A good and thoughtful response. I can't address everything, but I agree that I would also rather hit the occasional extra shot than walk an extra 150 yards. I just feel like for some players, it wouldn't only be occasional. When I was a teenager, I worked at the course and my boss for a couple of seasons was an old retired lady. Her rounds were like I'd described (a neverending succession of 5-woods). When our course put in a new set of front tees that shortened the course by over a thousand yards, she started using them immediately. I wasn't thoughtful or curious enough to ask her why or her thoughts at the time, but the preference seemed clear. The extra walk didn't probably matter to her as she was often riding a cart.

I guess my point is to try to get people to think about these other perspectives. Like I said, I'm on the side of fewer tees, but it's an easy choice to narrow it down to tees that are good for oneself without much thought for others.


I think it is almost impossible to set up courses so they can be played 'in regulation' by super senior women. I remember when I was a teenager playing with my dad at his then club, Bradley Hall in West Yorkshire. The second hole was a par three, 117 yards from the back tee (102 from the red tee, I just checked), steeply uphill to a severe two tier green cut into the hillside, with three deep bunkers in front of the green (see [size=78%]http://www.bradleyhallgolf.co.uk/page.aspx?pid=64934[/size]). I once watched a group of senior women play the hole. To a woman, they hit a wooden club short of the bunkers and pitched over them. Given the slope you would probably have had to have a tee at thirty or forty yards to ensure they could all reach in one.
Adam Lawrence

Editor, Golf Course Architecture
www.golfcoursearchitecture.net

Principal, Oxford Golf Consulting
www.oxfordgolfconsulting.com

Author, 'More Enduring Than Brass: a biography of Harry Colt' (forthcoming).

Short words are best, and the old words, when short, are the best of all.

Ben Sims

  • Karma: +1/-0
Re: Modern Tee Systems and The Lido
« Reply #62 on: August 17, 2023, 11:31:16 AM »
I played a front range course designed by Nicklaus a few days ago. It was carts only. Behind us was a senior ladies group that played from the forward-most tees. I don’t remember seeing a single drive from their group end up remotely near where mine did. They played it at 5200 and me closer to 6900. And still, the disparity was huge. I’m not sure how you design tees for that. I don’t think you can and what’s more, perhaps shouldn’t.


But…there’s another side to that argument. Parabolic skis (and rocker to a lesser extent) totally changed the game. The Rekluse clutch completely changes the skillset needed for riding a dirt bike. Hikers have almost universally embraced light highly padded shoes and boots (Altra and hoka) in lieu of the heavy leather Norwegian welted monsters of yesteryear. And of course we know what’s happened with golf equipment. It goes on and on.


So my question is this. More tees, easier equipment, where does it all end? Does it end? Should it end? The evolution of recreation isn’t going to stop.

Charlie Goerges

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Modern Tee Systems and The Lido
« Reply #63 on: August 17, 2023, 11:44:51 AM »
I think it is almost impossible to set up courses so they can be played 'in regulation' by super senior women. I remember when I was a teenager playing with my dad at his then club, Bradley Hall in West Yorkshire. The second hole was a par three, 117 yards from the back tee (102 from the red tee, I just checked), steeply uphill to a severe two tier green cut into the hillside, with three deep bunkers in front of the green (see [size=78%]http://www.bradleyhallgolf.co.uk/page.aspx?pid=64934[/size]). I once watched a group of senior women play the hole. To a woman, they hit a wooden club short of the bunkers and pitched over them. Given the slope you would probably have had to have a tee at thirty or forty yards to ensure they could all reach in one.


I think you and Ben are right about the difficulty of designing with the senior ladies in mind. And yet they are some of the most courteous and reliable customers/members a course could hope for. And no less deserving of an exciting variety of experiences that more typical distance golfers have available. I do not know the answer here.
Severally on the occasion of everything that thou doest, pause and ask thyself, if death is a dreadful thing because it deprives thee of this. - Marcus Aurelius

jeffwarne

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Modern Tee Systems and The Lido
« Reply #64 on: August 17, 2023, 02:11:06 PM »
One set of tees, forward ones, sounds good. Oh, and different spec golf balls that go different distances, ie rolled-back ball for long hitters, positive/plus distance ball for lessor players?
Whoops best not go there. See multiple other threads.
 :) :) :)
atb


Different balls, same tees.
I started a thread on that about five-10 years ago.
crickets.
Seems a better way...but
"Let's slow the damned greens down a bit, not take the character out of them." Tom Doak
"Take their focus off the grass and put it squarely on interesting golf." Don Mahaffey

Kyle Casella

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Modern Tee Systems and The Lido
« Reply #65 on: August 17, 2023, 02:16:36 PM »
I give many playing lessons to women who hit the ball 100-150 yards.
Although we are a walking course, I usually give playing lessons in a cart for options an mobility.
Last week, we had no carts due to 6 inches of rain in 4 days, and I carried a woman's bag for her.
The thing about a 4500 yard course is, especially a modern one, is the absurd distances between holes.
When terrain allows, wouldn't you just prefer to play the occasional extra shot rather than traipsing 60-70 yards from every green, then another 100-150 yards forward ON EVERY hole.
I found this to be incredibly unpleasant, often walking farther to the tee, than the length of the remaining hole.


Of course there are many holes where this isn't practical due to landforms/forced carries or unturfed areas, but one of the main reasons I pine for a rollback is to reduce the distances between tees(and the need for so many sets).
Once upon a time a 6700 yard course was a test for elites,6300 in the middle, while 5700 was deemed navigable for the shortest of hitters.
Sure they hit a lot more woods and long irons than players expect to now, but I'm just not sure walking a lot more and playing a lot less golf is all that great. I've never really understood why a player getting two shots a hole should expect to have a short iron into a green in regulation.
I'd rather play over terrain than walk over it-when practical.
This is/was often solved by having different pars for women.


Of course I'm a zealot and there is surely some middle ground, but the idea of so may tees seems so unsocial, with players, regardless of ability, expecting custom tees built just for them.
We used to call those fairways.


I guess there's no harm in multiple tees, it's just the expectation and demands for multiple combo tees(complete with scorecards and ratings) that irk me.


And this takes us full circle back to the idea of CBM designing Lido around the concept that players of different abilities could find a way to get to the hole from the same tee box!  ;D

Peter Flory

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Modern Tee Systems and The Lido
« Reply #66 on: August 17, 2023, 02:44:19 PM »
Courses need to be built with a bit tighter demographic in mind. One size fits all stuff is a fantasy.


I'm curious what this would mean. Should someone be building a 4200-yard Ballyneal/Sand Hills/Dismal clone and a 4200-yard Oakland Hills clone etc?

I actually love that idea.  I think that there could be a market for golf courses that are scaled down in every way for children, certain women, seniors, short hitters in general, etc.  One issue from just moving tees way forward on a big golf courses is that it results in a pretty boring round from a hazards and width perspective.  I think that there could be a market for courses that are shorter, but still proportionally the same as a big course.  So, if the target market customer averages 150 yards off the tee, design the hazards so that the players have something to think about and something to conquer. 

These courses wouldn't necessarily be "beginner's courses" that are meant to be easy, but just smaller golf courses that are still meant to provide a challenge.  They'd be easy to walk, they'd take up less ground, require less resources, etc.  Maybe they could be financed by taking a struggling 18 hole course, selling off 1/3rd of it to housing and using the other 2/3rds to build a 5,000 yard par 72 type course. 

I know from playing with one of my sons when he was little that it's not a ton of fun playing extreme forward tees when it requires a 100 yard walk forward on each hole before you tee it up. 

Thomas Dai

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Modern Tee Systems and The Lido
« Reply #67 on: August 17, 2023, 03:20:48 PM »
A long, long time ago quite a number of U.K. clubs/locations had two adjacent courses.
A longer length 18-hole course, often termed or viewed as ‘the Mens Course’, and a shorter length likely lower spec course probably only 9-holes often termed ‘the Ladies Course’.
Some locations even had two separate clubhouses. Some still do or have combined or amalgamated in some way or another.
Back to the future?
Atb

Mark_Fine

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Modern Tee Systems and The Lido
« Reply #68 on: August 17, 2023, 03:44:54 PM »
I will never forget years ago during a meeting with the Grounds Committee at Cherry Hills CC when I was reminded by an older member who said, “Just because some of us can no longer hit the ball over 180 yards doesn’t mean we want all the interest and hazards taken away from us.”  His comment has stuck with me ever since and I give it strong consideration when evaluating challenge and hazards,…


What a longer hitter or scratch golfer might call a top shot bunker, a weaker player or shorter hitter might call a carry bunker.  As such in the first instance the bunker is viewed as only penal whereas in the second situation it is viewed as strategic and thought provoking.  Some golfers can’t empathize and/or will never understand the difference as they only view the game from their perspective. 


All this said, if you really take the time to watch MOST golfers play, this game is really really difficult for them.  Just getting the ball consistently airborne in somewhat the general vicinity that they are aiming is a huge challenge let alone having to deal with some gaping bunker or steep run off or XXX yard carry, …. And as has already been pointed out, what for one is a driver/pitch shot, is three solid 5Ws and an accurate 7I or 8I for others.


Furthermore, I’m not sure someone building a 4200 yard replica of Oakmont or …. is the answer.  There would be a few that would love it but this would definitely not appeal to the far majority of forward tee players.  Most would switch to tennis or Pickleball after one or two rounds.  This is what “executive” courses are for.


I would encourage everyone to go watch a few dozen random golfers who have to hit shots requiring as little as a 50 yard carry over water. You will be shocked how many end up in the water!  I watched foursome after foursome play a hole like this at a public course and it was mind blowing. I walked away shaking my head wondering how do I make this game more fun for those kind of players after seeing what I just witnessed. 


There is no easy answer but allowing and encouraging shorter teeing locations for golf holes is a “starting point”  - pun intended  ;)

Ken Moum

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Modern Tee Systems and The Lido
« Reply #69 on: August 17, 2023, 04:19:55 PM »
I think it is almost impossible to set up courses so they can be played 'in regulation' by super senior women. I remember when I was a teenager playing with my dad at his then club, Bradley Hall in West Yorkshire. The second hole was a par three, 117 yards from the back tee (102 from the red tee, I just checked), steeply uphill to a severe two tier green cut into the hillside, with three deep bunkers in front of the green (see [size=78%]http://www.bradleyhallgolf.co.uk/page.aspx?pid=64934[/size]). I once watched a group of senior women play the hole. To a woman, they hit a wooden club short of the bunkers and pitched over them. Given the slope you would probably have had to have a tee at thirty or forty yards to ensure they could all reach in one.



I think you and Ben are right about the difficulty of designing with the senior ladies in mind. And yet they are some of the most courteous and reliable customers/members a course could hope for. And no less deserving of an exciting variety of experiences that more typical distance golfers have available. I do not know the answer here.


The thing is, even as a proponent of short tees, I find Adam's example a completely acceptable situation. There's no reason for them to expect to reach that green in one shot.  But extend that to a much longer hole, things become silly, IMHO.

I truly don't think the goal should be more and more tees, despite the success of the Longleaf System that has seven sets of tees and five combo sets for a total of 12 options. See the card here.


But I I'm 75.9 years old and my wife is four days younger than me. We are both VERY short hitters at this point, but we love to play, and we love good golf courses.  I rarely hit a tee shot over 170, and mostly 155-160. She's 30 yards shorter.


We don't 'expect" to be on any greens in regulation, even from the length of course we prefer.  But we just played in a Greensomes at Nairn Dunbar where she played from 5700 yards and I played 6700, as required for the comp. The par four fifth is 438 from the white tees and 400 from the green tees where she teed off.


In greensomes, hitting about half the shots, it's not so bad, other than the score.  But playing our own ball at that distance is pure drudgery.  So when we played it again on our own ball, I played green @5746 and she played Blue @ 5467. WE both managed to break 100.


If I play ~5000 yards in the US or ~5500 on linksland, I can get in the area of the green in regulation, and try to get up and down for a par. Which makes a huge difference in how much fun the game is and how much my old body gets beat up by the game.


If it were up to me there'd be no more than four sets of tees at 4000, 5000, 6000 and 7000. Then put three combo sets on the card.  Hell, 4500, 5500, and 6500 with two combo sets would work for 99% of golfers. As long as there aren't any 100+ yard carries off the shortest tees.
Over time, the guy in the ideal position derives an advantage, and delivering him further  advantage is not worth making the rest of the players suffer at the expense of fun, variety, and ultimately cost -- Jeff Warne, 12-08-2010

Charlie Goerges

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Modern Tee Systems and The Lido
« Reply #70 on: August 17, 2023, 04:57:39 PM »
Tons of cool ideas and perspectives coming out of this conversation. From limited flight balls, increased flight balls, small big courses and more. If we had to pick one, which has the most likelihood of adoption?
Severally on the occasion of everything that thou doest, pause and ask thyself, if death is a dreadful thing because it deprives thee of this. - Marcus Aurelius

Ben Sims

  • Karma: +1/-0
Re: Modern Tee Systems and The Lido
« Reply #71 on: August 17, 2023, 07:29:26 PM »
Tons of cool ideas and perspectives coming out of this conversation. From limited flight balls, increased flight balls, small big courses and more. If we had to pick one, which has the most likelihood of adoption?


Charlie,


I truly believe the cat is out of the bag with regard to the thing in our hands, the club. It’s going to be hard to go back.


Conversely, I also truly believe that the ball will come back quite a bit in the next decade. Imagine using our forgiving sticks with a ball that spins 10-20% more and flies 10% less. I think that’s the sweet spot and apparently so too does the USGA and R&A. It will hopefully “freeze” course length at its current place and casual/recreational golfers will begin to play a bit forward of where they are now. Fingers crossed.


That’s my hope and rational belief, based on where we are now. The “grow the game” initiatives we see have never resulted in smaller golf courses. At least not in a lasting way.  If people wanted those courses, we’d already have them. Full size courses and the top golf and/or golf simulator model seem to be what the market prefers. The middle road par three or executive course never really caught on. 

Thomas Dai

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Modern Tee Systems and The Lido
« Reply #72 on: August 18, 2023, 03:12:39 AM »
As I've mentioned before, no golf ball irrespective of it's specification nor the specification of whatever club it's hit with nor the physical size and strength of the person holding the grip should in still wind conditions be able carry from The Open tee on the 18th at TOC over Grannie Clark's Wynd. A simple measurement basis and easily recorded yardage.
And as ball/club technology and player strength improves or increases just adjust the ball back accordingly.
Easy to measure with an historical relevant measuring point (and it can all be viewed from the Secretary's Office window!).
atb

Charlie Goerges

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Modern Tee Systems and The Lido
« Reply #73 on: August 18, 2023, 10:58:52 AM »
Tons of cool ideas and perspectives coming out of this conversation. From limited flight balls, increased flight balls, small big courses and more. If we had to pick one, which has the most likelihood of adoption?


Charlie,


I truly believe the cat is out of the bag with regard to the thing in our hands, the club. It’s going to be hard to go back.


Conversely, I also truly believe that the ball will come back quite a bit in the next decade. Imagine using our forgiving sticks with a ball that spins 10-20% more and flies 10% less. I think that’s the sweet spot and apparently so too does the USGA and R&A. It will hopefully “freeze” course length at its current place and casual/recreational golfers will begin to play a bit forward of where they are now. Fingers crossed.


That’s my hope and rational belief, based on where we are now. The “grow the game” initiatives we see have never resulted in smaller golf courses. At least not in a lasting way.  If people wanted those courses, we’d already have them. Full size courses and the top golf and/or golf simulator model seem to be what the market prefers. The middle road par three or executive course never really caught on.




Broadly speaking, I agree you're right. I'd only caution not to equate what we have with what we'd prefer.


Thomas Dai brought up the practice of having a lower-spec women's course. If we wanted to go back to that, my only change would be not having it be "lower-spec", rather just shorter. I think it should be equally well-designed and maintained.
Severally on the occasion of everything that thou doest, pause and ask thyself, if death is a dreadful thing because it deprives thee of this. - Marcus Aurelius

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Modern Tee Systems and The Lido
« Reply #74 on: August 18, 2023, 12:47:28 PM »
From my limited experience, the next-gen of golfers don't want any cutback on service, amenities, or visuals, but they do want less formality on their part, lower cost, and probably need easier, shorter, but prettier courses. 


In a way, that is nothing new.  It remains to be seen just how courses will provide for both in a way that meets the market of the near future.


We are drifting in several ways away from the specific topic of how they might work at the Lido, but also, what else is new? :)
« Last Edit: August 18, 2023, 12:52:19 PM by Jeff_Brauer »
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back