[Richard Boult]

Bobby Weed at TravelGolf.com recently posted an article on slow play and indicates that operators and architects can make a series of minor mistakes whose cumulative effect creates a tremendous drag on the round.

Some culprits include: lengthy green to tee walks; short tee time spacing; design of opening 3 holes; existence of back tees when tournaments not in progress; lack of target visibility and distance from fairways and cart paths.

Source: Slow-Play: The Hidden Culprits

[A_Clay_Man]

They may be the hidden causes, but the obvious ones are lack of proper teaching of both ettiquette and common sense in situational procedures. i.e. continuous putting.

[redanman]

I believe that the design of the first three holes makes all the difference in the world.

In Chicagoland, that was one thing different at Kemper Lakes as opposed to Cog #4. (Two of the earliest CC-FAD's)  Maybe Jeff Brauer can chime in.  

I have the original handout describing the hole by hole architectural design in which he wrote that a gentle start (without a ball-buster par 3) in the first three was a goal of the KL design.  Whether it was a response to CH #4 or not, it always struck me how well a round got going and kept pace at Kemper vs. Dubsdread (#2 par 3 is a killer and gets you going slow real fast after a tough first par 4 dogleg left (hard for slicers)).

To this day I always look at how nines (when both start at the same place and are alternate "first" tees)  get started as to types of holes and how flow gets started or stopped.

[RJ_Daley]

Right you are Adam.  I play with a lot of swell guys.  But, they get so carried away with our little 2-2-2s and quarter and half dollar petty skins games and such, and they take way too much time lining up their putts and marking 2 footers rather than just putt out.  You know it is just aping what they see on TV.  

Of course Mr. Weed's thoughts are on designing for more efficiency.  But like you, I think much of the problem lies more in the modelling that players imitate from the tube as to how they go about the game.

[Craig Sweet]

I can also go along with the design of the first three holes. At my home course we open with a par 5 and that means you have a foursome on the tee, in the fairway and on the green or close to it, as well as a foursome in the "hole".

Immediately there is a jam up.

[Kyle Harris]

Craig,

That is a function of a bad starter. Every starter should tell the group on the tee to wait until the group in front has REACHED their second shot before teeing off. No log jam there.

The starter can also then get a reasonable idea of which groups play slow and which won't.

On par 4 openers, don't tee off until the group in front reaches the green.

[JohnV]

I'm not so sure about how the start of the course makes a difference.  Pumpkin Ridge's Ghost Creek starts with two medium par 4s and then a difficult par 3.  The back 9 starts with a reachable par 5, a tough par 3 and then a long par 4.  Sometimes on weekends they started play on #10 rather than #1.  The pace of play was usually 30 minutes faster on the days they started on #10 than when the started play on #1.

The start wasn't the problem, the overall difficulty of the front 9 vs the back 9 got players off to a much slower start and they never caught up.

I think that the spacing of starting times is the main factor in slow play.  When I've worked tournaments with 9 minute tee times, the pace of play is much slower then when we've used 10  or even 11 minute times.  And those are for groups of 3, 8 minute or 7/8 minute tee times for groups of 4 make it impossible for anyone to get going.  Those kinds of starting times just amplify the lack of knowledge that players might have or the difficulty of the start.

[Tom Huckaby]

Craig,

That is a function of a bad starter. Every starter should tell the group on the tee to wait until the group in front has REACHED their second shot before teeing off. No log jam there.

The starter can also then get a reasonable idea of which groups play slow and which won't.

On par 4 openers, don't tee off until the group in front reaches the green.

Kyle -those are great ideas, but I'm chuckling because you obviously live in a different world out there.  As correct as you are, the chances of my home course (a) even having a starter and (b) getting people to wait to tee off until the group reaches the green on the par 4 opener are absolutely nil.

Thus Santa Teresa is the home of glacial golf - and interestingly it seemingly makes none of the "mistakes" Bobby Weed mentions, at least not in terms of design.  Oh I agree those can be slow play causes; but what makes Santa Teresa rounds take 5.5 hours on a good day are these factors and these alone:

1.  Ridiculous 7 minute intervals for tee times;
2.  The type of stuff Adam mentions, which is seemingly endemic to the public course golfer.

Nothing else Bobby Weed mentions exists there... the distances from green to tee are all minimal... #2 is a par five, but only reachable by very long hitters or when the reverse wind is present... it's not a slow play cause at all.

TH

[Sean_A]

Right you are Adam.  I play with a lot of swell guys.  But, they get so carried away with our little 2-2-2s and quarter and half dollar petty skins games and such, and they take way too much time lining up their putts and marking 2 footers rather than just putt out.  You know it is just aping what they see on TV.  

RJ

You guys stand around over two footers in a friendly?  I thought you guys up in Cheeseland were a liberal, friendly sort of crowd!

Ciao

Sean

[Craig Disher]

I think the slow play problem is mostly one of attitude. Course layout, tee times, etc. affect pace of play only marginally.

Golfers in the US accept 4-4.5 hours as a reasonable time to get around the course. What's another half hour? The possibility of a 3 (the usual goal at UK clubs) hour round isn't even considered, particularly at public and semi-privates.

[Tom Huckaby]

I think the slow play problem is mostly one of attitude. Course layout, tee times, etc. affect pace of play only marginally.

Golfers in the US accept 4-4.5 hours as a reasonable time to get around the course. What's another half hour? The possibility of a 3 (the usual goal at UK clubs) hour round isn't even considered, particularly at public and semi-privates.

Craig - I'd agree that has something to do with this as well.  A thread was up not all that long ago asking about cultural differences between US and UK golfers - this is one of the big ones.  4.5 hours is seen as fast play by most Americans, and would be seen as glacially slow by most UK golfers.  Of course there are many reasons for this - the design of their courses being a big one, with none of the issues Bobby Weed mentions either - but still, expectations definitely do play a role here.

TH

[Pete Lavallee]

Definetly agree on the tee time issue; 10 minutes verses 7 minutes makes all the difference in the world. Here is the problem I have; how can you convince the course operator to let 6 foursomes off per hour (10 min spacing) and not 8 foursomes (7 min spacing)? How can Bobby Weed say this:

Studies have shown that tee times spaced 10-12 minutes, separate groups more effectively. The longer interval actually allows more golfers onto the course each day.

Can someone show me how more golfers will get onto the course?

[Tom Huckaby]

Pete - I'd sure as hell like to see that as well, as my pleas to the Santa Teresa operators have definitely fallen on deaf ears.  Money talks and that's all that talks, to them.  If it can be shown they derive more income with 10 minute times, hallelujah they'd have to listen.

My dim mind is having a hard time wrapping around this also, though.  Because as much as I understand the 10 minute intervals will mean faster play (not to mention more enjoyable), well... it's not like this is a continuous loop... it doesn't really matter when groups FINISH 18, because that has no effect on when groups START on 1... if it did I could understand this...

But in terms of income, how can it be that less people starting means more of such?

I too don't get it, as much as I want it to be true.

TH

[RJ_Daley]

Sean, some of those guys are tighter than the paper on the walls...

Also, Men's league rules: everything must be putted out...silly, IMO.  But at least, continuous putting would go a long way to speeding it up.

[Kyle Harris]

Craig,

That is a function of a bad starter. Every starter should tell the group on the tee to wait until the group in front has REACHED their second shot before teeing off. No log jam there.

The starter can also then get a reasonable idea of which groups play slow and which won't.

On par 4 openers, don't tee off until the group in front reaches the green.

Kyle -those are great ideas, but I'm chuckling because you obviously live in a different world out there.  As correct as you are, the chances of my home course (a) even having a starter and (b) getting people to wait to tee off until the group reaches the green on the par 4 opener are absolutely nil.

Thus Santa Teresa is the home of glacial golf - and interestingly it seemingly makes none of the "mistakes" Bobby Weed mentions, at least not in terms of design.  Oh I agree those can be slow play causes; but what makes Santa Teresa rounds take 5.5 hours on a good day are these factors and these alone:

1.  Ridiculous 7 minute intervals for tee times;
2.  The type of stuff Adam mentions, which is seemingly endemic to the public course golfer.

Nothing else Bobby Weed mentions exists there... the distances from green to tee are all minimal... #2 is a par five, but only reachable by very long hitters or when the reverse wind is present... it's not a slow play cause at all.

TH

Tom,

Yep, I remember talking about it with you before... unfortunately unless you guys are supermen out there... not much you can do.  

[Sean_A]

Sean, some of those guys are tighter than the paper on the walls...

Also, Men's league rules: everything must be putted out...silly, IMO.  But at least, continuous putting would go a long way to speeding it up.

RJ

Get these guys to use inferior wall paper paste next time, get a partner and change the rules to matchplay.

I have always thought that starting with a par 3 or a driveable par 4 is a great way to start because the green needs to be clear before hitting.  That will be about a 10-15 starting time interval.  Perfect.  It works very well at my club.

Ciao

Sean

[Tom Huckaby]

Kyle - so you can see how I'd be VERY interested in these studies Bobby Weed quotes, right?  There's little that can be done to solve things in terms of attitudes and the like... but money does talk.

 

[Brent Hutto]

I have always thought that starting with a par 3 or a driveable par 4 is a great way to start because the green needs to be clear before hitting.  That will be about a 10-15 starting time interval.  Perfect.  It works very well at my club.

To me that's always been the obvious solution, too. On the one hand it would annoy the course owners because they'd have to choose between more-than-10 minute tee times or else having a huge backup on the first tee. On the other hand after that opening hole everyone ought to be able to sail along unencumbered.

[Jim Thompson]

As an operator I can tell you that slow play is about 85% the operators fault if they've got a reachable par 5 as a first hole and 100% fault if they don't.  The accordion factor is the number one need for providing a smooth flowing golf experience.  Granted, it the US we take 4 - 4.5 hours.  I would argue that a good .5 - .75 hours is just spent improperly driving or fussing with carts and that if chauffer service and the spectator aspect of golf on this side of the pond could be corrected we could cut another .5 hour off very easily!

Why operate on 10 minute tee times instead of 7/8?  The answer is simple.  When you run ten minute tee times you do not need any starter times.  You create spacing so the play of the course isn’t a connected train waiting to crash and log jam.  Your customers come back do to a pleasant experience.  Your afternoon times run on pace and you save your reputation as a 6 hour death march.

One thing we implement is that we don’t allow players to tee off before their tee time.  When ever we get any hesitation from the player we just explain to them that can wait here where’s there’s a practice putting green or wait out on the third tee, the first par 3.  Most choose to hit a couple extra puts.  Starters and rangers are not the all purpose solution either.  If operators want to fix pace of play issues in the US we need to educate folks on how to actively use carts in a well paced manner, convince folks that there is nothing rude about ready golf, and help folks manage their approach to the game near greens.

Cheers!

JT

[Brian Gracely]

Tobacco Road is a prime example of the architecture and routing contributing to slow-play.  Granted I wouldn't change a thing about the place, but it has a few characteristics that lead to rounds closer to 5hrs that 4hrs:

- Driving Range that doesn't allow woods to be hit
- First hole calls for a Driver and often a reload if fairway is missed at all
- All holes are lined with long native grasses (lost balls)
- Blind tee-shots cause players to wait longer to see players ahead (2, 7, 15, 16, 18)
- Some walks that don't naturally flow from green-to-tee (3/4, 12/13, 14/15, 17/18)
- Several sets of holes that tend to bunch players either due to being risk-reward, blind or Par 3 (4-7), (16-18)

I think the one thing Joe Gay could do to improve play is try and  encourage players to use the appropriate tees (especially on 1, 2, 9, 13, 14, 16, 18), but that's a tough think to do on a public course where you don't know the skill-set of players day-to-day.

[Evan Fleisher]

To all of the above pace-related issues, has anyone ever checked out this resource:

Pace Manager Systems

Being an Industrial Engineer this stuff has always fascinated me...

[Jason Topp]

A couple of articles linked in the website

http://www.pacemanager.com/articles/gbm0701.htm

http://www.plga.org/news/news.html

[Pete Lavallee]

Why operate on 10 minute tee times instead of 7/8?  The answer is simple.  When you run ten minute tee times you do not need any starter times.  You create spacing so the play of the course isn’t a connected train waiting to crash and log jam.  Your customers come back do to a pleasant experience.  Your afternoon times run on pace and you save your reputation as a 6 hour death march.

Jim,

I agree that this helps pace of play and customer enjoyment, but...when you have an unlimited customer base like we do here in So. Cal. (piss of a golfer there are dozens waiting to take his spot)  and you are motivated by profit, why would you send off less golfers per hour? Even the muni's here have turned their operations over to Management Companies (like American Golf) and they are in business to make money. 32 pissed off golfers make you more money than 24 happy golfers per hour; so why should they change?

[Tom Huckaby]

Pete - VERY well said.

Jim - change "SoCal" to "NorCal" and I have the exact same question regarding our situation here.

We may be unique in that customer service is absolutely not required... but try to imagine this, and put yourself in the shoes of the Santa Teresa (or Balboa Park) operators... not much incentive to do 10-min tee times, is there?

PLEASE give me some ammo...

 

[Phil Benedict]

Tobacco Road is a prime example of the architecture and routing contributing to slow-play.  Granted I wouldn't change a thing about the place, but it has a few characteristics that lead to rounds closer to 5hrs that 4hrs:

- Driving Range that doesn't allow woods to be hit
- First hole calls for a Driver and often a reload if fairway is missed at all
- All holes are lined with long native grasses (lost balls)
- Blind tee-shots cause players to wait longer to see players ahead (2, 7, 15, 16, 18)
- Some walks that don't naturally flow from green-to-tee (3/4, 12/13, 14/15, 17/18)
- Several sets of holes that tend to bunch players either due to being risk-reward, blind or Par 3 (4-7), (16-18)

I think the one thing Joe Gay could do to improve play is try and  encourage players to use the appropriate tees (especially on 1, 2, 9, 13, 14, 16, 18), but that's a tough think to do on a public course where you don't know the skill-set of players day-to-day.

Aside from rudeness, insensitivity and ignorance on how to keep up the pace of play among the US golfing populace, Brian highlights one architectural feature that contributes to slow play on many modern courses - fescue and other "native grasses."  It's almost impossible to find golf balls in native grasses but it doesn't stop golfers from trying.  Architects love these grasses because they think it makes the course look like Ireland or some other linksy place.  I hate the stuff unless its the wispy kind of grass where you can actually find your ball.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()