Maintaining a championship tee over 6500 yards

[Garland Bayley]

Garland,

   Did the 6500 yard course that was laid out 80-100 years ago have bunkers 275 yards out from the tee?  I didn't know they hit it 275 in 1935 
   

   I don't think it is wise to increase a course that is on 100 acres to 7000 yards.  I think we are in agreement.  I shouldn't have used the word Can't. (all apologies).  Hopefully in 2019 I can make it to the Buda and you can enlighten me....

I suggest you read The Evangelist of Golf. CB McDonald disowned his son-in-law for driving one of CB's 300 yard par four greens at NGLA and bragging about it.

[John Kavanaugh]

Garland,

   Did the 6500 yard course that was laid out 80-100 years ago have bunkers 275 yards out from the tee?  I didn't know they hit it 275 in 1935 
   

   I don't think it is wise to increase a course that is on 100 acres to 7000 yards.  I think we are in agreement.  I shouldn't have used the word Can't. (all apologies).  Hopefully in 2019 I can make it to the Buda and you can enlighten me....

Hey cut a green,

French Lick Hill has had three 230+ yd par 3's forever.  Those guys had strength, not sure how, but they did.

[Joe Hancock]

Architecture defined as bunkers 270 out from the tee is not a flattering description. A lot of this conjecture isn't taking into account all the different aspects of acreage...shape, climate, altitude, terrain, soils, etc.....so I don't see the point of trying to box in the architect or the architecture in any manner.

Joe

[BCowan]

Joe,

   Good point, I agree.  All one has to do is play a Dr Mack course to understand what you just wrote.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Peter,
It would be nice if, say,  Jeff Brauer chimed in and explained what the cost of adding yardage actually is.

But I can tell you one cost - building a 7,200/7,500 yard course does little to nothing toward promoting the game of golf, and the side effect of such developments is that they prop up all the other silliness that surrounds the business and the game. It's a marketing tool that leads to an upward spiral in costs and a downward spiral in participation, and it makes it that much harder to build a thoughtful course at a yardage that accommodates 90% of all non-tour players. We have enough courses measuring over 7,000 yards (like 2/3s of the top 100) to satisfy the needs of the long players, it's time to change the focus.     

[Sean_A]

The point, well mine anyway, is not to box an archie in, but liberate the archie (and golfers) from standard design principles.  The point is for developers to start looking at a 125 acre footprint.  Now compare that to 300 acres and there is a serious savings before a design hits the paper.  I am also not saying there can't be longer courses, but if we are going to talk about sustainable golf, then less acerage, less yardage, more economical design and therefore less inputs must eventually be a real alternative.  Otherwise, all the talk is a bf joke...a waste of my time. To me its as bloody obvious as a Roman's nose.  And beside all that, I have seen many big hitting low capper get his ass kicked by 6000-6500 yard courses.  Sure, they are well designed short courses, but so what...are we saying archies can't do the same now?  If guys feel golf is too easy (which it isn't for most of the yahoos stepping back to longer tees only to struggle to break 80 - for christ sake  ), change the numbers on the card, call par 60 for all I care...its a lot cheaper than most courses being designed for practically nobody.  It amazes me that guys can still harp on about the need for 7000 yards...when there are a ton on the planet. 

Ciao

[BCowan]

The whole boom and the nonsense created from it was driven by artifical interest rates.  Now it seems as though more Non housing golf courses are being built.  I nor anyone who may agree with me is saying that a course should lead with marketing a long course!  It's not about golf courses being too easy Sean, it is about players wanting to hit a long iron into a par 4 every now and then!  Who cares if the guy struggles to break 80 from the tips?  As long as he is playing golf in 4 or less, you or I shouldn't give a DAMN!  We aren't harping, we are tired of the double talking nonsense and the authoritarian outlook!  Did your GCA Group think card expire Sean?  

Jim,

   How many courses has Jeff done under $6 million?  Participation in golf has nothing to do with a course measuring 7,000 yards.  This is utter nonsense.  You aren't comparing apples to apples.  Courses built 80 years ago were built more for the love of the game, not to build box golf courses to sell homes!  6800-7,000 yards is close to the yardage many state AM's are played at!  Are you going to administer playing performance tests there too?  Are state run Golf organization too dumb too?  

[Daniel Jones]

I certainly don't need more 7000+ yard courses in my life...I'm perfectly happy at the 6450 yard Muni down the street. But...the two courses across town located in 55+ communities with their 7300 yard "monstrosities" are packed 7 days a week. Sure 99% of those playing are teeing it up at 5500 yards, but what difference does it really make if their business is doing just fine with an unused 7300 yard tee? The course is packed...Hooray!

[mike_beene]

Often the tour course has say 7300 yards available but only uses 7000.Also, many 6500 yard courses have several very short 4s and still leave you with perhaps 4 or 5 longish 4s and several longish 3s.Throw a few doglegs and forced layups in and there are some 6500 yard courses that require plenty of longer approaches.

[Ken Moum]

it is about players wanting to hit a long iron into a par 4 every now and then! 

Hell, that's easy, just stop calling 550- to 600-yard holes par 5.

Even better, lets eliminate par 5s altogether.

The pros play pretty much all of them as two-shot holes anyway.

K

[Thomas Dai]

I wonder how many 6,500 yd courses really are 6,500? Not just tees moving up and down and pin position changes but the method of measurement - eg rear of back tee to rear of green? inside or outside or middle of doglegs? Seems like quite a bit of scope for variations and descrepancies are possible, maybe, dare I say it, deliberately so.

I remember a European Seniors Tour event where the 'card' as published said 400 yds or so for one hole but I know the course well and could see they were actually playing from the forward men's tee at about 340 yds. Smoke and mirrors.

atb

[mike_beene]

Thomas, after our course was redone, neither we nor the architects determined the yardages. I believe the
Texas Golf Association or either the USGA did the measurements. There was a lot of speculation as to what the final yardage would be.I was surprised that it went up slightly.

[SL_Solow]

In the USA, in order to remain in good standing with the USGA for handicap purposes, a course must be periodically rated ( I believe it is at least every 7 years) in which a course rating and a slope rating is calculated from each set of tees.  As a matter of practice, a permanent marker is placed in the ground where measurements begin and the hole is measured to the middle of the green.  Obviously, tees are moved on a day to day basis as are hole locations so distance may vary.  Most Supers I know balance the tees that are moved up and back, as well as hole locations, but I am sure there are aberrations.  Tours have been known to do strange things to encourage lower scores.  But the basics are determined when a course is rated.

[Jud_T]

So, to extend the analogy, aside from the fact that there are several threads on this EXACT topic, if a 7000 yard course takes no more land and no longer to play than a 6500 yard course, then a 7500 yard course takes no more time or money than a 7000 yard course, and 8000 = 7500 etc.  So exactly at what point do you need more land, money, time and game?

[BCowan]

  So there aren't several threads on Kingsley and 50 on the golf ball?  the land imo is rather minimal in the grand scheme, but each course is site specific (all one has to do is look at a golden age course extended to 7000 yards on min original acres).  Someone playing a 7,000 yard course is probably taking fewer strokes than someone playing a 6500 yard course (time question answered).  How many 7500 yard courses are there (now we are exaggerating)?  To what extent (level of maint.) is the 7500 tee maintained at?  Is all the land being utilized to its fullest for a tight routing?  What is the difference if the back tee is 7000 yards or 6700 yards?  How different is liability on US courses vs GB&I in regards to routing a course tightly?  ''So exactly at what point do you need more land, money, time and game?''  Such a broad question that is rather unreasonable.  Are we talking private course, country course, public course.  How much per acre?  Existing course?    ''then a 7500 yard course takes no more time or money than a 7000 yard course, and 8000 = 7500 etc''  No, that isn't the case and I think you know it.

[Garland Bayley]

...  Someone playing a 7,000 yard course is probably taking fewer strokes than someone playing a 6500 yard course (time question answered). ...

So that's the key! I need to play longer courses to lower my scores. No wonder most of you guys can beat me, you play longer courses. Who knew?

[Bruce Wellmon]

I love reading BCowan's threads  to challenge myself to see if I can figure out if I can possibly comprehend one of them in any way. Still unsuccessful at this point, but its coming soon, I can feel it.....

The rest of you thread jackers, have you ever cut a green before....  

I cut my grass at home once or twice a week. Does this qualify me to have an opinion?

[BCowan]

I love reading BCowan's threads  to challenge myself to see if I can figure out if I can possibly comprehend one of them in any way. Still unsuccessful at this point, but its coming soon, I can feel it.....

The rest of you thread jackers, have you ever cut a green before....  

I cut my grass at home once or twice a week. Does this qualify me to have an opinion?

Why of course  .  Have you found success in comprehension of the opening post?