[Jeff_Brauer]

We all know the average handicap hasn't gone down in the last bazillion years or so.  We also know equipment is better, etc,

I always figured that the reason for the static handicap is that the average golfer simply has no time or inclination to learn and practice putting and the short game, which accounts for so many strokes and even more of the ability to score well.

Heard the opinion yesterday that golfers were better today, but because courses are so much tougher today, it offsets.

IMHO, the upscale daily fee is much tougher (more design interest?) on average than nearly any public counterpart from 50 years ago, due to the constant "one upmanship" of the 1990's. I would imagine that on balance, private clubs are about the same.

On the other hand, the small "domed" greens of many ma and pa courses of yesteryear couldn't be easy to hit and hold, and better condtions on fw, rough and greens would seem to help play more than hurt it.

I have no idea how average slope ratings of different courses in different eras might compare.......

[Adrian_Stiff]

I think courses are tougher today, they are longer, narrower. The other side of the coin equipment makes them similar to yesteryear perhaps. Conditions were not as good and average handicaps may have stayed the same but there are more scratch golfers today. In the UK in 1976 there were 92, I expect there are 5000 now. Also, there are a lot of good pro's now, a pro who could play off scratch could make money in the old days, +4 pro's struggle now, they are ones revisiting tour school.

They are ways to firm it up and make holding greens tougher like yesteryear, I think the thought is unpopular with the powers that be and maybe it does not suit many modern courses.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Adrian,

Given who was making the point about more good golfers, I suspect that there may be more low handicapper and scratch players now.  If nothing else, 1% of 12 million golfers is less than 1% of 25 Million golfers.

Statistically, fewer golfers are playing 25 rounds than before, as well.  It wouldn't surprise to see higher handicaps with lower participation, thus leaving the average handicap at 20, while there are more good players.  More high, more low, less in the middle.

Not sure courses are narrower overall.  Perception overkill IMHO, and besides, sixty yards of fw at 1" cut can't be easier than 30 yards at 1/2" and 15 yards each side at the former fw height of 1", can it?

[Adrian_Stiff]

Jeff - I can only speak UK but a lot of our averagey courses seem to have gotten very narrow with their fairways, I think 40 yards was common 25 years ago but some have widths at 25 yards now and the average is probably 30. Its their way of making their now short courses tougher, also courses used to have fairway left of, right of, behind and in front of greens, thats dissappeared with lightweight mowing patterns. Very few UK courses have gone wider.

[JESII]

I've heard that statistic and always wondered if they bother to measure the same golfers over that period of time...I'd bet the average drops then.

I think it's a screwy statistic to try to read anything into...

[Don_Mahaffey]

Golfer's short game sucked 100 years ago and their short game probably sucks even more today because their is so much focus on distance and equipment. Just because you can hit it farther doesn't mean your any better at getting the ball into the hole. In the last 30 years courses sure seem to have gotten easier to me, if just because the turf and over all conditions are so much better, but I'm still a lousy putter.

[Mike Hendren]

A few unsupported opinions:

Today's courses are not more difficult - just perhaps more complicated/cluttered.
Superior course conditioning makes the game much easier.
Modern technology (starting with a perfectly round golf ball) makes the game much easier.
Today's courses are easier as greens are typically approached with much shorter clubs.
Greenside sand is no longer a hazard thanks to Mr. Sarazan.

Mike

[Mike_Trenham]

Today's tight yet regularly watered turf makes the game much more difficult for the boggy+ player.

It used to be that the fairways were shaggy so the ball would sit up.  Try hitting a three wood off of tight turf with eighty mph of club head speed.  Yet great players love this for hitting their mid irons on the same hole.  Also non computer controlled watering caused fairways to only get watered when they needed it most, so the regular players tee ball hit low ran a ton more than today.

Ok now near the green chipping to greens running eight from a lie with the ball sitting up in the approach was a lot easier than a tight lie to a green running eleven today.  And yes it maybe easier to putt today's perfect surfaces if you have a decent stroke but Joe average could two putt a lot more readily on slower greens.  Long putts and chips are one of the more difficult parts of modern golf vs. 25 years ago.

Like Herb Grafthis (sp) said decades ago the biggest change in golf is the mowers.  Unfortnately the mowers are making the game easier for the best and harder for the worst players.  They also make it more expensive.

[Paul Stephenson]

I've heard that statistic and always wondered if they bother to measure the same golfers over that period of time...I'd bet the average drops then.

I think it's a screwy statistic to try to read anything into...

One of the SABR (of SABRmetrics) guys plotted average batting skill from the late 1800s until 1980.  He found that Roger Hornsby's 1924 record year of .424 would have equated to .339 in the NL in 1979.  He would have finished second to Keith Hernandez who hit .344 that year.

I'm sure you could run a similar model using data from your home course fairly easily.  If you had lots of time, you could use GHIN and run the model for the US as a whole.

[Matthew Petersen]

A few unsupported opinions:

Today's courses are not more difficult - just perhaps more complicated/cluttered.
Superior course conditioning makes the game much easier.
Modern technology (starting with a perfectly round golf ball) makes the game much easier.
Today's courses are easier as greens are typically approached with much shorter clubs.
Greenside sand is no longer a hazard thanks to Mr. Sarazan.

Mike

This is not true for the vast majority of amateurs, sand wedge or not.

[Jeff Shelman]

I post this having zero data and having done zero research.

But I think courses today are more difficult because double bogey and worse seems to come into play much more quickly and more often.

In housing development courses, there is usually more out of bounds. On sites that aren't as great, there is often more really bad places to hit it.

When I think of classic courses, I think primarily about parkland courses, many of which is a solid chunk of land in some form or another. There are fewer holes with out of bounds and, in many cases, fewer places to lose your ball  and make a big number.

I could be wrong, but that's my gut feeling.

[Joe Bausch]

Keith Hernandez

That is one magic loogie!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gcaq4ElAJrE

A classic.

[Richard Choi]

Shouldn't you be able to get an answer by comparing average slope ratings of courses over time?

[Eric Strulowitz]

I think that one thing that makes present day courses harder is that most modern courses are built around housing developments.  Out of bounds comes into play more frequently, and scores can add up quick.  Sometimes there is a long drive between  holes, this kills one rhythm and because the houses dictate the routing vs the land, you sometimes get some hideous, very difficult holes.

People seem to like gimmicry, and that shows a lot today compared to the minimalist designs of the past. These gimmicks just make the game harder and rounds longer.

I started playing golf in the mid 70's and I remember most people playing from the white tees.  5800-6200 yards was the norm.  Now, no one seems to play from the whites,  6200 yards is considered "sissy".  I see so many players out there hitting from 6600 yards plus, they have no business there.   So courses that might play fair from the whites for the average golfer, become harder than they need to.

I have played all over the world, and nothing beats the minimalist designs of old and some today.    If we had less gimmicks, golf courses would be cheaper to build and maintain, green fees would be lower, and the industry would not be in the slump it is today. 

 A course with a slope of 110 gives a hakcer the  chance to get a few pars and not lose a load of balls.   I don't know why easy courses are not built anymore,  is it all about ego?     Most courses are 130+, that is very difficult for anyone who is new to the game or the casual golfer.

[Tim Martin]

Keith Hernandez

That is one magic loogie!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gcaq4ElAJrE

A classic.

  . Is there a more dynamic duo than Kramer and Newman?

[Jim Nugent]

Shouldn't you be able to get an answer by comparing average slope ratings of courses over time?

No, because slope is about the difference between bogey rating and course rating.  Bogey could get a lot harder, and slope could stay the same, so long as course rating went up the same amount. 

[Melvyn Morrow]

Because many have decided to use wheels  to get around a golf course today does not mean that the courses  are getting harder. I fear we the golfers are getting weaker and so seem not capable of enjoying a testing course. Add the mix of high tech equipment and one wonders why so many moan.

The reality of the situation is very simple we as the human race are not as strong as we think. The humble remote TV control has exploded into serving a vast array of other products meaning that we do not get even the minimal exercise, but that’s progress. Nevertheless do not think that technology has made the golf course easy; it’s that the technology has made us weak.

Any doubt then go and play a game of Hickory over your course by walking and using eyes to judge distance while enjoying the heat of the noon day sun. We are no longer what we were even though we can blow the world up 100 times over with our technology.

Golf pre 1920’s was challenging and so were the great courses of those earlier periods.

Technology 1 - Golfer 0 = Golf -10

Melvyn

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

Jeff, I agree the average daily fee is tougher today than the average muni of yesteryear. However there are the Pecan Valleys and Memorial Parks here in Texas that really do build quality games by making one have a strategic mind and develop all the shots to play them. the same cannot be said of the daily fee world for the most part. I do not think course today are harder or even better as a whole. The RTJ Sr era was all about tough.

[John Chilver-Stainer]

Personally speaking, on some mid range courses in the UK I feel they’ve got tougher for the average player. When I started off in the 60’s there was little or no irrigation, and the rough (and sometimes the fairways) was kept down by sheep grazing. Sometime during the 80’s the Greenkeeper profession became more sophisticated and universal “green” grass became the minimum quality standard. This goal was strongly  pushed by the Fertiliser, Irrigation, and Machine Suppliers and soon the sheep were off the course and the greens and fairways gleamed. The rough was too difficult or time consuming to maintain and was allowed to grow, as a result long grass has encroached into former “playing” areas. The Environmentalists encouraged the conversion of rough into ecological areas and soon “free” trees were also planted between the fairways.

The increase in length of the driver, particularly at say 15% increase over the years, also increased the “splay” or inaccuracy by 15%. So a Driving Zone of a Fairway at previously 45 yards would have to be an equivalent 52 yards wide, however the irrigation single line pattern would prohibit widening the corridors, so the fairways appear to be thinner.

Around the greens the Greenkeepers find it easier to maintain the surrounds with a high cut semi-rough rather than a fairway cut, so the bump and run shot was lost, which for smaller greens meant  the average player required increased wedge skills to get near the hole from off the green.

Certainly there are courses that have avoided this cliché, however the newly built courses have rarely ventured away from the Formular of “Green” as this is what the Client expects and anything less would be open to strong criticism and possibly defy the “Norms” and “Recommendations” that support the Design Contracts and Construction Contracts.

As a compensation the smoother greens, perimeter weighted clubs and the almost indestructible golf balls have made the game more forgiving.

[Melvyn Morrow]

John

A good and Interesting  comment, although in parts I agree with the course condition. However I feel the improvements have made life easier by limiting choice, less necessity to focus mind leaving the only real opportunity to go for the wham bam thank you Mam fast and quick approach. I feel this minimises the ability to get to grips (perhaps navigate is more appropriate) a course or in particular a Hole. Add to this the jump in technology since the 1960’s leaves many a great course, the ones once approached with much reverence, today rendered little more than above average. I feel it’s a crime to have allowed heritage to follow many of the great stately homes we once had in GB. About time something along the lines of a Listed Building or a Grades be placed upon what left of the great courses we once had but allowed to deteriorate thanks the blindness of our Governing Bodies.   

Nevertheless I do follow your point regards the condition of the course and hazards.

Melvyn   

[John Chilver-Stainer]

Melvyn,

Thanks fo the reply – I did qualify my thread by referring to the average player – say 18 Hcp and upwards.

For the good players who have little trouble keeping the ball on the playing areas, and profiting from the ca. 15% increase in length off the Tee on the shorter courses., they frequently diminish the second shot of Par 4’s to Sand wedge range.
Those great Par 67’s and 68’ are inreality being reduced to an even lower Par and as a result less attractive for the better player.

I’m a great supporter of the notion of the “ancient” courses being subject to “Preservation Orders” with strict rules to alterations and maintenance practices.

I would also support the idea of bifurcation of the golf ball, with an official “shorter ball” for the “Listed Ancient Golf Courses” in order to maintain their original strategic qualities. Ideally the Clubs themselves should voluntarily apply a “Preservation Order”, however it’s up to the governing bodies such as the “R&A” to support and reward such an ethos.

Now there’s some food for thought.

[Melvyn Morrow]

John

I have encountered the R&A work on a few places in St Andrews and there is no consideration or respect for what they have or hold. I wonder what future damage The R&A will do to our game, its traditions and the crown jewels, our courses.

Do not get me wrong I want the R&A to continue as the face of golf but they must act for the good of the game of Golf.

I will say our club scene has been the savour of many of our old courses. They have battled to keep them playable for their Members yet are happy to share their little wonders with the world at large, just as long as we do not shout their name too loud as we need to keep the modern Tom’s away. 

Melvyn

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()