[Tony Ristola]

A) Does it matter to you if you can't see where your longer shots (past mid-irons) finish on the driving range?

B) Does it matter if the tee is elevated substantially to the point you can't really gauge the distance of your shots?

For me neither of these really matter, except for shots 100 yards and closer. That's where I'd like to have an idea so I can figure out distance control for the day. Otherwise I'm interested in the pattern or lack of pattern of curvature and trajectory from mid irons and longer, and not seeing the ball finish doesn't affect this. I've got a good idea how far I hit it, and this isn't going to change overnight.

You guys?

...and (C)... what's the best course with the worst range?

[Jeff_Brauer]

Tony,

Its always nice to see the shots land....it encourages posing after the shot, which makes the bucket (or pyramid) last longer.

I'm with you on shot pattern, but better players could probably complain about wind directions, etc. that might affect their ability to practice. As elevated tees, average golfers love it, and good ones know how much it affects their distance.

The first bad range/good course combo that comes to mind is Castle Pines, where they apparently forced a range into an uphill situation to save land.

[A.G._Crockett]

The elevation on a range only matters if the course has range balls that are good enough and uniform enough so that knowing the distance that the ball went translates to the distance that the balls in your golf bag will go, and that often isn't the case.

That said, a range with big elevation changes is fine for warming up, not so good for practicing, two distinctly different activities.

My nomination for the worst range would all the courses that don't have a range, including my own club.  Of course, I am able to console myself by remembering that if it DID have a range (among other things it lacks), I probably wouldn't be able to afford to belong anyway.

[D_Malley]

Tony,

most good players practice full swings on the range only worrying about solid contact, trajectory, and curvature.  For the other 95% of golfers they are totally concerned about how far every shot goes, and therefore want to see the ball land.

[Mark Smolens]

Troon North at 8 am (facing into the sun) and Butler National (where the members pay the Village of Oak Brook $50k per year for the right to use the polo field because Paul Butler didn't think a range was needed!).

[Matt_Ward]

Tony R:

In regards to the best course with the worst range -- I'd put Baltusrol in there because fo the severe uphill terrain. I'm sure I can add a number of others. Bethpage for years had one of the real pitiful ones you can imagine -- they could have filmed war movies the ground was littered with potholes and other debris.

In answering your first questions ...

I need to have quality balls to hit. If that's not there -- see ya !!!

In regards to seeing the ball land -- I like to watch trajectory and movement of the ball and getting a sense of where it lands provides me with some additional feedback.

If a tee is elevated I can make the adjustment mentally in regards to the total distance in conjunction with just how high the tee is situated.

[Tommy Williamsen]

Tony, I will use a "driving range" only to warm up. When I practice I want good balls and greens so I can see what the ball does.  My one club has Titleist nxt tours.  I'll use them for bunker shots up to Driver.  Elevation and distance are very important for practice.  I also want the grass to be the same as the course itself.

[Steve Verde]

Not necessarily a good course but the worst range I have ever seen is at Tattersall/Broad Run/whatever you want to call it. It is literally a 70 degree uphill incline with pins just stuck in the middle of it. Also, Hudson National has a poor range with it being on a severe slope and limited land. I probably wouldn't be able to hit fairway woods. There are very nice vistas from their top range though.

[Jason Topp]

Visibility of landing is very important to me for irons. I tend to think my shots are better than they are.  Watching the ball land forces me to face honest feedback.

My course has a relatively new range with a bunch of good green like targets guarded by angled bunkers.  One of the greens (170 yards) is blind and it drives me nuts.  

[Matt Vandelac]

I like to see the ball land, but with age it's a guess more often than not with the longer clubs for me.  Seeing the ball land from SW to 3-wood would be important for me.  
The worst range for me at a good golf course is Town and Country in St. Paul.  Absolutely Brutal.  
In the past year I've played a handful of courses that have you launching balls off a high point to oblivion; not being able to see a ball land after 50 yards.  I would have been just as satisfied hitting it into a net.  

[Mike McGuire]

...and (C)... what's the best course with the worst range?

The Wynn Club in Las Vegas (Tom Fazio) - mega millions to build.

The range is 30 yards long. You hit into a net.

[Pete_Pittock]

I think a range shold be relatively flat while having drainage, and no elevated target greens which hide landing areas.

[PCCraig]

Many would consider it bad, however I think it is great...Shoreacres' Driving Range. Essentially in the middle of a forest, next to the driveway into the clubhouse and logistically its 200 yards down the first hole...but there is never anyone on it and that makes it great!

[D_Malley]

i always wonder why so many people are extremely concerned with the question of what distance each flag is at on the range.  Are these people really trying to figure out how far they hit each club ON THE RANGE! i can see trying to get a feel for pitching distances on the range, but other than that you are much better off to figure this out on the golf course with an accurate playing yardage and better more consistant golf balls.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()