In Defense Of The Runway Tee

[Mike Hendren]

On another thread, Tom Doak states that he doesn't want to see another decade of runway tees.  

I like them.

They are elastic.

They are easily maintained.

They are natural if low profile (The tee at the Cascades' 3rd is one of my favorites anywhere).

They can be visually intimidating from the back - even more so the narrower they are.

They require more thought in their placement - i.e., the architect has only once chance to get it right.

Their long lines can dupe the player by obfuscating the line of charm.

They look cool.

It's what I grew up on.

I like them.

How 'bout you?

Mike

[PThomas]

Bogey:  I'm giving you a double bogey for this one

I hate em

they look so ugly

[Garland Bayley]

I will give you the maintenance point.

[Brad Klein]

Such elongated aircraft carrier strip tees are especially good if they are so long that from the middle and back you can only see the front of the tee and not the golf hole or any landing area.

Plus, you can always practice full lob wedges oin the tee while waiting for golfers up ahead.

They have the added advantage of creating an inadvertent golf course architecture effect that is much underrated, namely vertgo, thanks to the mower guy, hangover and all (or acid flashback), who cuts in wavy lines, or just slightly diagonally, thereby disorienting you as you address your tee ball. They also save on labor-wasting handwork by encouraging greenkeeprs to rely upon massive, wide gang ride-mowers. Altogether, they are a big plus.

[A.G._Crockett]

Conditioning, conditioning, conditioning.

In years past, I would have said that I dislike them, because there just isn't much way that they are aesthetically pleasing.  But now, after a number of years playing at a course with very small, very separate tee boxes, I wish we had'em.  

Also, they provide a way in tournaments to really get in golfers heads on par threes.  You can move the distances around just enough day to day to cause some problems with club selection that help separate the better golfers from the pretenders like me.

[Mike_Cirba]

Mike,

I personally enjoy watching my playing partners (or better yet, the group in front of me) pacing off the 28 1/2 yards from the permanent concrete marker to the tee settings for the day to get an exact yardage on par threes.  It's better still when each member of the foursome decides to do their own pacing.  

Can't side with you here, my friend.  Aircraft carriers are only good for landing planes.

[Mike Hendren]

Mike,

The fact that you and one of America's leading authorities on golf course architecture (see above) must resort to witticisms, to use the word liberally, comforts me greatly.

The aircraft carrier reference is entirely inappropriate as even the golden age vessels were 700' x 110' (deck).  I thinking more like 150' x 12'.  I suggest we therefore refer to them as "manufactured homes."  

As for the pacing on par threes, the problem isn't the teeing ground - it's the company you keep.

Mike

[Mike Hendren]

Sean,

I'd rather look down a long runway than a over a wide expanse of multiple tees that resemble the Whack-A-Mole arcade game at Chucky Cheese.

Mike

[Mike Hendren]

Sean,

Amen, brother.

Mike

[Kyle Harris]

I was thinking of the advantage to square tees this morning while... mowing tees.

I don't necessarily like runway tees, but tee boxes should be square, unless the curves fit the landscape.

At HVCC, we have both, and they fit the landscape as needed.

Low profile is always a plus.

[Peter Pallotta]

Bogey,
I hadn't ever given it much thought, but now that you mention it:

"They can be visually intimidating from the back" - check

"They require more thought in their placement" - check

"Their long lines can dupe the player by obfuscating the line of charm" - check

"They are easily maintained" - check

"They are natural if low profile" - check

"It's what I grew up on" - check

"They look cool" - check (in a retro sort of way)

I don't know how anybody can disagree with you, or your defense.

Peter

[Mike_Cirba]

Sean,

I'd rather look down a long runway than a over a wide expanse of multiple tees that resemble the Whack-A-Mole arcade game at Chucky Cheese.

Mike

Mike

Well, you don't provide much of a sturdy straw man by way of comparsion.

You've managed to cite two of my pet peeves (runway tees and multiple, multiple, multiple (more than 3 is excess bordering on sin) tees all in a row) on one thread!  

As far as aircraft carriers, you tell me?  (btw) those are rows of carts parked adjacent.  

http://tinyurl.com/m57y3

[Bill_McBride]

Personally, I much prefer the formal "East Lake" look.

It accomplishes the same thing as the RTJ aircraft carrier (okay, mfd home) tee.

But each is a separate entity, usually two with a smaller forward tee ahead, and is precisely square or rectangular and really flat.  There may be an elevation change between the two rear tees.

The net effect is to have almost as much teeing space, but a lot cooler look.  JMHO  

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike Hendren,

I like them if they fit the golf course.

At Pine Tree and Boca Rio they fit marvelously.

At Pine Tree they're mostly at ground level.
Boca Rio's tend to be slightly elevated due to the course being at or below sea level in areas..

Maintainance wise they're a dream.
Construction wise they're easy, although, alignment is critical.

And, as you say, flexibility is a plus.

Unfortunately, in the "Courses by Country" section, the photos of Boca Rio don't reveal the runway tees.

I've never heard anyone claim they were an architectural or playability liability at either Pine Tree or Boca Rio.

[Andy Troeger]

I also think they fit the golf course very well at Point O'Woods in Michigan. The course itself is pretty flat, so you don't have issues with not being able to see landing areas, and the tees aren't so ridiculously long (other than #13) that they cause the issues complained about, at least for me.

I don't think I've seen them anywhere else (or don't remember them if I have), so that's about all I'm qualified to comment on.

[Sean Leary]

Doesn't Augusta National have them as well, on many of the Par 4's and 5's?

[Brad Klein]

Bogey, my owen view is since there's no rational defense of such tees, and no serious discussion possible about their merits, there's no point trying to make cogent arguments. In other words, the topic is a joke.

Having said that, I would concede one point. One of the unfortunate consequences of liberally-minded architects going to 4 or 5 sets of markers is that they started scattering little tees all over. Peye Dye did this for a while, and now he's learned, having reverted to clumping of markers on a smaller number of teeing grounds, so that you can have, say four or five different sets, but on three different turfed areas. This is much preferable to either scatterd small tees or massive long ones.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Brad Klein,

Why do you state that there's no rational defense of those tees ?

Dick Wilson used them very well at a number of well regarded golf clubs.

Garden City Golf Club has them and they seem to fit and function very well.

All too often, some on this site complain about multiple sets of tees (foot pads).   Wouldn't one tee, one foot pad, be a viable option ?

Sean Leary,

I believe you're correct

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike, Brad and Sean,

I think Seminole has their fair share as well.

[DMoriarty]

The aircraft carrier reference is entirely inappropriate as even the golden age vessels were 700' x 110' (deck).  I thinking more like 150' x 12'.  I suggest we therefore refer to them as "manufactured homes."  

Surely the best defense of these things is that they not only allowed flexibility from day to day, but they also allowed the golfers of different abilities to play from the same tee with different markers.  

So, I ask you, just how long would runway tees have to be to accomodate a wide spectrum of golfing abilities these days?   Surely 50 yards (150') wouldn't do it.  Would you still like runway tees if they were 150 yards long?

Just another reason why the sky is indeed falling.  

[Steve Lapper]

Mike,

I personally enjoy watching my playing partners (or better yet, the group in front of me) pacing off the 28 1/2 yards from the permanent concrete marker to the tee settings for the day to get an exact yardage on par threes.  It's better still when each member of the foursome decides to do their own pacing.  

Can't side with you here, my friend.  Aircraft carriers are only good for landing planes.



Then you must really hate #15 at your favorite track

[Patrick_Mucci]

DMoriarty,

The 16th tee at Pine Tree is about 165 yards long.

And, it's a good hole from 670 or 505, depending upon your ability.

[DMoriarty]

DMoriarty,

The 16th tee at Pine Tree is about 165 yards long.

And, it's a good hole from 670 or 505, depending upon your ability.

Must be some flat land.  If they tried this at Rustic one end of the tee would have to be around 40 ft. higher off the ground than the other.  

[ed_getka]

Bogey,
   Whack-a-mole tees. Priceless.

[Brad Klein]

Pat, you mistake Dick Wilson using them for him using them well. It's a matter of scale, proportion and landscape aesthetic that makes me find them, for the most part, objectionable.