Long Walks Between Holes

[Tony Ristola]

"And there's a 300-yard trek over protected wetlands between the par-4 11th and par-3 12th that pretty effectively discourages walking on a course that might otherwise seem very walkable."
Ron Whitten
http://www.golfdigest.com/courses/critic/index.ssf?/courses/critic/brantonwoods.html

"Through the wetlands would seem to be an enjoyable walk.

Does a 300 yard walk between holes discourage walking for you...in a temperate climate without mountain climbing to the next hole?

Though not desirable, it wouldn't discourage me from walking.  For those who have played Stanley Thompson's Cape Breton Highlands course...did you walk or ride?

What's your walking threshold?

[Bob_Huntley]

Tony:

No matter how staunch a walking proponent you are, I defy you to enjoy walking some of the treks between green and at at El Dorado in Cabo san Lucas.  An enjoyable place to play though.

[Tony Ristola]

Haven't been to Cabo since Palmilla and Cabo del Sol were under construction, so I don't know the El Dorado course but can imagine the potential treks.  What I'm interested in learning is...on a course devoid of mountaineering, roughly how much of this would you be willing to put up with?  Would it or would it not turn you off on an otherwise enjoyable course?  

[Steve Lang]

 

300 yards on one is ok, but how many others are there on the course?

As a typical walker, I'll do about anything once, even TD's Highpointe (back nine) and Black Forest courses in Michigan, which have some good treks, and plenty of elevation change. but I find the threshold of pain being more a function of the overall length of time for a round versus length/elevation of the walk.

You're normally walking about 4 miles tee to green, and another mile or so green to tee, throw in some misc wandering, you're at 5 miles easy at about any course.  If I were to just walk that far, it'd take around 75 - 90 minutes at a 4 mph gate.

So, anything more than 100 yards is a pain, but its really a pain when you're looking at that overall 4.5-5+ hour round.  On our WCC courses we have normal 35-75 yard walks and a couple of long walks of 100-150+ yards.  These typically involve road crossings, but only several per course.  However, as a twosome with my bride, we've walked all of our courses in 3 hours or less, in hit and walk, hit and walk style.  

We do however walk with reduced sets of clubs 9 or 10,..So..
if the cart comes with greens fees, I'm riding.  

[TEPaul]

In my opinion, on a course that's designed to accomodate walking play, a 300yd walk is generally an unovercomable routing glitch of some kind. Some courses have them, if the net effect is worth it but on a walking course it's not a great idea without a great reason. Routings on walking courses are best, obviously, when green to tee comutes can be tightened up! If it's a real cart course though, I guess it's OK!

[Mike_Cirba]

I've played courses that are eminently walkable, yet due to the peculiarities of the property, some long green to tee walks are dictated.

As much as the purist in me believes them to sometimes be routing errors, it's also been clear in many cases that environmental areas and other property limitations have forced their occurrence, so I find myself having a tough time always blaming the architect for forces beyond their control.

Besides, sometimes there is nothing quite like a long, non-playing walk to clear the head and rejuvenate the spirit after a silly three-putt, or a bad hole, or even just to spend the time enjoying the freedom and refreshing mindlessness of a long, purposeless walk in the great outdoors.

[JWL>]

Bob Huntley

While I dislike long hikes between green and tee as much as anyone, we had one little problem we couldn't overcome at ElDorado in Cabo San Lucas.
The Mexican government wouldn't let us move the highway.  In fact, there were only two existing tunnels under the road and quite frankly, it was one hell of a routing just to link the holes to  tunnels going both ways.  Also, when you have such a rugged piece of land, it is often necessary to have longer than normal connections to get past a ridge or peak.
I am glad you apparently enjoyed the course, because I am very fond of it.

[Gib_Papazian]

In my view, the biggest faux pas I observe is not in the length of the walk, but the apparent inability of the bean-counters pulling the strings on these overpriced CCFAD's to understand the importance of making the walker comfortable.

How many times have I insisted on walking a course, only to come upon a long trek with nothing more than a cement ribbon connecting the holes.

Cement. No dirt, no wooden pathway, no accomodation for the walker - just wear out your soft-spikes pal and we'll be happy to replace them for $25 a set after your round.

I still cannot believe that at Barona Creek, Todd did not scream bloody murder with the Tribe. The only way for a walker to get to the next hole besides trudging on cement was picking through the sticker bushes and weeds.

Of all people, I would think the architect ought to be the most insistent that the paths encourage walking because that is the best way for a golfer to fully grasp the strategy, aesthetic arrangement and visual texture of their creation.

It goes back to my belief that rating a golf course from a cart is like trying to evaluate the composition of a painting from the side.  

Neal and I are not making that mistake. . . . . ever.  

Inexcusable management arrogance is the problem, and another symptom of the incalculable damage done to our game by cigar smoking yuppies who view golf as just another activity instead of a way of life.

It is astounding how many of these cloven hoofed slugs ride a cart to play golf on Saturday and then spend Sunday huffing and puffing up Mt. Tamalpais on a mountain bike.

It doesn't make sense, like that enormously fat woman in the coffee shop yesterday who ordered a decaf nonfat latte and a piece of coffee cake dripping with grease and sugar.

I was grousing about the long, sun baked walk on the back nine of Rustic Canyon, wondering aloud how they could have routed the course in such an awkward fashion on that one spot when the rest was so beautifully executed.

Neal pointed out - as he does most of the time when I get off on one of my snotty tangents - that at least the path was dirt and they had planted trees that would eventually make it a pleasant stroll through the shade.

Has anybody ever paced off how far the walk is from #15 at Cypress to #16? Distance means nothing, that is probably what Raynor was thinking . . . . ooops, that's right, Geoff and Naccarato are still unable to face the cold truth about who routed the course. Luckily, there are support groups for these kinds of issues.

But back to the subject at hand. The trek from #15 to #16 at Eagle Point (Jones, Jr - Southern Oregon) is steep and uncomfortable. The payoff is a stunning view of a distant moutainous landmark (I believe it is called Angel's Wings) and a wonderful par-5 that cascades down the hill before finishing quietly beside a lake.

But dammit all, you first walk on cement straight up the hill, there is no bench halfway to sit on for a moment and catch your breath - and no water when you finally reach the summit. I felt like we needed petons.

Stupid stupid stupid. You know why? Because my friends that play the course all the time are older fellows and most of the time take a cart only because of that one spot.

So instead of a peaceful and relaxing walk on one of the most aesthetically pleasing courses I have ever played, the majority of the patrons contemplate the architecture from the seat of a cart on the far edge of the fairway.

I'm not suggesting that they ought to have routed it differently and avoided the big payoff on #16 - there is always an element of show biz in Bobby's designs - but that one spot would not draw attention to itself if broken into two segments with a bench, a little snack wagon and a kid in a cart to shuttle players up the hill if they so choose.

A small thing, but it is often the little details that prove crucial.

The direct route between #5 and #6 on the Lake Course (Olympic) used to be up a cement path that was hard on your legs and just plain ugly. It is steeper than you might realize.

A couple years ago, when power was wrestled from the monkeys and put in the hands of real golfers, the first thing the new chairman did was get rid of all the railroad ties lining the cartpaths (originally put there because the previous chairman did not think the members could be trusted to stay on the paths) and moved most of the cement out of sight.

Now, the aforementioned walk seems short and pleasant because the path is out of sight and you walk up the hill with grass underfoot and trees overhead. In truth, it is a nice break.

So, I guess the moral of the story is that in my opinon, its not how long the walk, but how it is presented. The more pleasing aesthetically, the less it draws attention to itself.

[TEPaul]

Gib Papazian wrote:

"It is astounding how many of these cloven hoofed slugs ride a cart to play golf on Saturday and then spend Sunday huffing and puffing up Mt. Tamalpais on a mountain bike."

That's a beaut! "Cloven hoofed slugs" should definitely get into Forrest Richardson's new golf dictionary.

[ForkaB]

Tony

Depends what you mean by threshold?  If it just means what will you do, given the choice, I'll walk anything.  Gib and I and Neal M. actually walked Pasadera which ought to put us in the Guinness Book of Records or at least on Letterman"s Stupid Human Tricks.  However, if threshold means there is an "Is it a golf course, or just an asphalt-connected collection of golf holes" criterion, than I think that anyplace that cannot be enjoyable walked by a reasonably fit person fails that test.

Gib

Great piece.  One of your best.  Let me just ask, however, did the "cloven hoofed slugs" create the demand for the golf cart or did the golf cart create the opportunity for slugdom?  I think the latter and wonder how many of those slugs would be on their mountain bikes on Sunday if they had been able to get their aerobic exercise by walking a well-designed course with some changes in elevation at a 2 1/2 - 3 hour pace on Saturday?  Perhaps they would even be back on Sunday, learning the greatness and beauty of this game or ours.......

[TEPaul]

Rich:

I think I must disagree with you again! It seems difficult to lay blame on either carts or slugdom exclusively! It seems there may be some nefarious symbiosis at work here between cart manufacturers and mountain bike manufacturers to create 'slugdom' on golf courses--at least certainly on Saturdays in San Francisco!

It smells like some kind of mega merging conglomerate, probably some general entertainment giant like AOL/Time Warner that has umbrellaized American cart manufacturing and mountain bike manufacturing.

It's likely all just a bottom line oriented technique. You just can't maintain acceptable mountain bike sales without a certain rather large level of 'slugdom' on golf courses on Saturday as mountain bike day in San Fran is Sunday.

Anyone who knows anything about West Coast golf archtiecture should know that, including you.

[TEPaul]

However, the ability of some Golfclubatlas contributors to delve deeply into various golf architectural areas never ceases to amaze and impress me.

Gib Papazian is such a contributor. He's apparently not only uncovered the reasons for "slugdom" but he's identified possibly an evil or even satanic force at work here by accurately describing these golfers as "cloven hoofed slugs".

He's shown there's a satanic element on San Francisco's golf courses on Saturday morning--and the same element can be found on Mt Tam on Sundays too.

Personally, I never trusted that San Francisco area! I always knew strange things were going on out there! That's the main reason I got in my Firebird and went home very quickly in early 1971!

[Mike_Cirba]

One of the real complications of long "walks" between holes creates is when a foursome consists not entirely of either walkers or riders.  

I've been asked to "hop on" the back, which is certainly NOT the way to enjoy the respite, not to mention potentially ankle-twisting.  

[TEPaul]

MikeC:

There's actually a very good reason to encourage "hopping on the back of carts" and also "ankle twisting". Many of these mega conglomerates also own the companies that own the hospitals! For bottom-line business reasons a certain high level of "ankle twisting" needs to be maintained!

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom;

Another little known contributor to the problem, besides the ubiquitous mega-orthopedic-conglomerates you mentioned is the fact that the longer the cart ride, the better the chance that the driver of said cart FORGETS that someone is actually holding on by their fingertips to the back!!

[TEPaul]

MikeC:

Good for you! You've delved deeply into much of the symbiosis of modern golf architecture and other related entities. The interrelatedness of business interests in golf and its architecture today is truly phenomenal.

Do not forget, though, on those long "hop on" commutes that the really clever architect will call for a few very strategically placed trees and tree limbs (generally at the end of the commute when, as you correctly said, the cart driver has forgotten about the "hop on golfer").

This is to encourage a rather high level of neck injuries and such! For a minor neck or back injury the golf course generally gets in the neighborhood of a 15-20% kickback from the hospital/insurance entitiy and with really serious neck or back injuries obviously the cut to the club can go down to around 5-10%!

But nevertheless, what's good for business is good for golf and its architecture! Alister MacKenzie would actually approve of this universal method of things as it can be proven that more courses will be built this way.

[Forrest Richardson]

Golf carts are not ideal, to be sure. But they have transformed the game, occasionally positively. Many sites that are regarded "ideal" or near so for golf have been made possible by separating greens from subsequent tees so the natural land stays put and is not overly shaped to accommodate golf. Rugged sites where golf was not thought possible have been transformed.

When the time arrives that personal transportation methods are developed which allow people to transport themselves as if wearing rocket packs on their backs, will such conveyences be used on golf courses? Yes, of course.

Imagine the views one could get from zipping around above a course checking out the approaches, hazards, etc! Indeed, imagine the thrill of hovering above tees, watching your fellow golfers attack a hole. Or taking a "stroll" before your round, high above and out of harm's way.

Walks between holes are not ideal -- but as technology improves these walks will one day seem trivial. That is my guess.

[Mike_Cirba]

Forrest;

What is the proper "cruising altitude" to avoid being struck by airborne shots?    

[Forrest Richardson]

160 feet at sites with altitudes below 4,000-ft. above sea level on nominally wind condition days.

[A_Clay_Man]

What's the appropriate definition for "cloven hoofed slugs"? = Target demographic?

Also, if they're cloven hoofed, does that mean they are kosher?

One interesting variable is the placement, in the round, of the long or arduous walk. Here at Pinon, the Monkees (who are still in charge) reversed the nines some years ago. I've heard two justifications, one was that they couldn't see the first tee very well from the clubhouse and the other was that the course is a bitch when you have to climb a sizeable hill to get out of the canyon signature hole, late in the round. As for the first, it's total B.S. because they use a walkie talkie anyway, and the other, rips the heart, soul and teeth out of the golf course that was intended. Rather than building like a quality symphony, with the reversed nines you now start somewhere near where the courses teeth begin to show.

I look upon that late arduous walk as another bicuspit, but now it's placed too early in the round to have an impact on slugs, sharks or non-decathaletes.

[Tom MacWood (Guest)]

I played Cape Breton prior to the choice...it was walking only. It's like 10 or 11 km walk from the 1st tee to the home green, but it was one of the most enjoyable walks I've ever experienced in golf. The extraoridnary beauty of the site and its variety - sea, mountains, deep river valley, riverside etc. was a major factor. Another factor were the nature of the walks, fairly narrow dirt paths through a jungle of woods and wilderness...you really had no idea how long each walk would be (relatively short or very long), because you rarely could see your destination. There was a sense of adventure, journey and also a little bit of anxiety. You were deep into no man's land, without any sign of civilization, you sometimes wondered did I take the wrong turn, maybe I'm lost and getting out of here is not going to be an easy task. Then the path would open to a new vista and you'd finally reached the next hole.

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom Macwood;

Aren't there bear in 'dem 'dare hills??  

Nevertheless, I've got to get up there.  Can't wait to see what REAL danger would do to my already frayed short game nerves!  

[THuckaby2]

Ahhh, one of my favorite subjects.  I too enjoyed Gib's rant... er, I mean piece.    Having recently played Pasadera, I stand in absolute awe at the insanity, er, I mean devotion of you guys walking that course.  I guess one of Scott Burrough's dicta has now been absolutely proven:  no course is unwalkable.  You guys ought to give Tehama a try next... I'm guessing you walked that also but please do confirm.  

In any case, both of those are mountain goat treks and thus not really "on point" here.  I'd say the same about El Dorado in Cabo... great course, but again walkable only by the idiots... er, I mean devout walkers.... such as those who would attempt such at Pasadera.

Dan King would call the game played at these courses "cart-ball", at least how I tackled each.  Not to get into this argument AGAIN, but damn, I was able to play 36 at El Dorado very easily - viva la Cartball!

In any case as Gib so eloquently gets at, there are walks and then there are walks.  Yes, it is a long way from 15 green to 16 tee at Cypress Point, but that is one of the great walks of all time as it serves to heighten the anticipation for seeing the great #16... it also takes you through a somewhat Middle-Earth looking forest - I kept expecting elves or hobbits to hop out and greet us... That is a wonderful walk for sure, and in fact adds to the greatness of that course.

What kills me are the concrete ribbons Gib laments (though I am often riding over such... where those occur, walking for me is nearly always just not worth the effort)... but still, those do suck.

What kills me more are routings that COULD HAVE BEEN DONE DIFFERENTLY to help the walker, but were not.  Top of mind here is my little new local muni, Los Lagos GC in San Jose.  They had to create a LONG bridge over some wetlands... just setting aside that this protected environmental area is a dump not exactly teeming with any redeeming beauty, hey, the law is what it is... the routing makes you cross it  FOUR times instead of just up and back, just so #9 can return to the club house.  You play 1-2, walk about a mile to #3, play 3-7, walk the same mile back to play 8, play 8-12, walk a mile to #13, play 13-14, walk a mile back to play the rest.  Just by making the current 13 play as 8 and 9 would save two of these treks!  In case you're interested, the routing is here:

http://www.playloslagos.com/golf/layout.shtml

That's the most glaring "contempt for the walker" routing I've ever seen, but the principle isn't just occurring at this course... sad to say....

TH

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom Huckaby;

The interesting thing is that Los Lagos is a 5400 yard, par 68 course and STILL not routed to facilitate walking!!  Sheesh!  

[Steve Lang]

Let us no forget the slugs have less opportunity to work off fluids whilst riding, sometimes making getting up from their seats an exhilarating rush for the senses when DUI..