[Jordan Wall]

Recently I was speaking with the assistant pro at Seattle CC and he mentioned how Seattle CC was one of the few courses he had seen which had a mens rating from the forward (red) tees.

Why don't we see the front tees rated for men on so many courses?
Shouldn't a course be interesting from every set of tee boxes, and thus be rated from every tee box?

[Glenn Spencer]

What happened to your stance that Women should play with Women and Men should play with Men?

[Dan Herrmann]

It'd be an awfully low course rating...

[Jordan Wall]

It'd be an awfully low course rating...

Yes, a 66.7 rating.

Yet I struggle playing to my handicap from those tees.

[Doug Ralston]

Hey!

I am a short hitter and have played a lot from the FRONT tees. Please DO rate them for men, regardless of what Glenn thinks of me  .

[Paul Stephenson]

Our men's night group of 12 is going to put some money in the pot and play the next 5 Wednesdays from a different set of tees.

It should be interesting.  I agree with Dan, I think it's going to be hard to play to my handicap from the forward tees.

[Tom Huckaby]

In NCGA, we only do men's rating from the most forward tees if the course asks us to.  And if they ask, we'd do it - we have no reason not to.

It's up to the courses....

[Mike Hoak]

Tom,

The Virginia State Golf Association has the same policy in place.

[Garland Bayley]

It'd be an awfully low course rating...

Yes, a 66.7 rating.

Yet I struggle playing to my handicap from those tees.

Leave the woods at home. There is a tiny Korean woman at my club that is 3 to 5 strokes better than me. One day I played her from the forward tees. To handicap myself I determined that I hit 4 iron as far as she hit driver, and 6 iron as far as she hits fairway woods. Restricting myself to using those clubs as my longest clubs, I beat her handily. Besides not using woods, I also stayed out of them.

[Tom Huckaby]

Mike - wouldn't you guess (or know) that this is the normal way to handle things?  That is, if tees are played by men and the course wants a rating, the golf association would do it... but that we don't routinely rate tees that are never played by men....

Right?

[Mike Hoak]

If the tees are played by men, we would have to rate them here in VA.  I assume that is the same throughout the U.S.  We recently had two courses in Northern Virginia ask for mens ratings from the red tees so that they can calculate handicaps for their junior boys.

[Tom Huckaby]

Mike - gotcha - thanks.  

I've been doing course ratings for 4 years now, have yet to do a course that asked for forward tees to be rated.  Interesting I have also wondered why some don't....

TH

[Ken Moum]

It'd be an awfully low course rating...

Yes, a 66.7 rating.

Yet I struggle playing to my handicap from those tees.

Leave the woods at home. There is a tiny Korean woman at my club that is 3 to 5 strokes better than me. One day I played her from the forward tees. To handicap myself I determined that I hit 4 iron as far as she hit driver, and 6 iron as far as she hits fairway woods. Restricting myself to using those clubs as my longest clubs, I beat her handily. Besides not using woods, I also stayed out of them.

My wife and I have talked about those kinds of games a bit, and the only possible way for you to come close to playing on a level field with her would be to use a Cayman ball.

The advantage isn't just the long clubs, it's that when you're 125 from the green you have a wedge in your hand. Add that to the relative ease of hitting a 6 iron compared to a three wood, and it's not a fair fight.

But the Cayman, now that would make it a game.
http://www.golfballs.com/PB1054/Cayman-Pimple-Limited-Distance-Golf-Balls.html

Ken

[Jordan Wall]

It'd be an awfully low course rating...

Yes, a 66.7 rating.

Yet I struggle playing to my handicap from those tees.

Leave the woods at home. There is a tiny Korean woman at my club that is 3 to 5 strokes better than me. One day I played her from the forward tees. To handicap myself I determined that I hit 4 iron as far as she hit driver, and 6 iron as far as she hits fairway woods. Restricting myself to using those clubs as my longest clubs, I beat her handily. Besides not using woods, I also stayed out of them.

Yes, I was challenged to use the forward tees at Seattle with nothing but my irons (and hybrid) and scored as well as I ever had (-2).

However, when I need to practice precision, I play the forward tees and hit my woods.  Usually I hit my driver 280ish and from the red tees the fairways usually tighten up quite a bit at that point, thus making it harder to my driver accurately than from the back tees.  Its a good test, not what I expected when I was challenged to play the reds.

I like the fact I can play a course and have my round be just as interesting from the reds as the blacks.

[JohnV]

In NCGA, we only do men's rating from the most forward tees if the course asks us to.  And if they ask, we'd do it - we have no reason not to.

It's up to the courses....

What Tom said.

The club typically tells us what tees they want rated for what genders. We have a couple of clubs that wanted the very back (of 4) tees rated for women.  Many of the clubs around here have gold tees that typically are almost the same as red, but the macho old guys don't feel like they are playing the same tees even though the rating would be almost identical.

[Dan Herrmann]

It really shows just how poor many or our short games are that we shoot a similar score from up front.  If only I could convince myself to practice these shots more often!

[Steve_ Shaffer]

It would do many of us a lot of good(and have a lot of fun) if we played from the very forward tees every once and awhile. Playing the same tees at the same club time after time gets boring unless the super mixes the tee locations up now and then.

[Doug Ralston]

Am I the only man here who is thrilled if he gets 200yd from his driver, and finds 375yd nearly an unreachable par-4? I generally play 5700yds or less. If that is the forward tees, and often it is, then so be it.

I once watched 4 'men' going off from the back tees at Fox Run [very tough course]. Every one of them hit pathetic shots, hitting into trees, water, grounding the ball, and no one hitting it long at all. They were a 6hr round in action! What IS this pride that makes 'men' not able to resist trying to 'perform' for their buddies?

BTW, Fox Run is rated for women from all tees [the tips being sloped 155!]. Yet the front tees are NOT rated for men. Why? Too much 'pride'. Well, as stated above, I have seen 'the fall'; and it sucks!

Rate 'em all and let us be as we are. Golf should be joy 1st, manhood later!  

Doug

[Ken Moum]

Am I the only man here who is thrilled if he gets 200yd from his driver, and finds 375yd nearly an unreachable par-4? I generally play 5700yds or less. If that is the forward tees, and often it is, then so be it.

I'm not thrilled, but I do find that it's getting harder and harder to get past the 200 mark.

I would play ~6100 if I could, but several courses I play don't offer that option.

I see courses like Longbow in AZ where it's 5,830 or 6,472.

At home, I told a friend I was planning to start playing the gold tees (5,941), and he said, "What do you gain by that?"  

Of course, he's also involved in a charity scramble where they finally decided to let men over 70 play the gold tees.

FWIW, our forward tees, @ 5,403 aren't rated for men, and the white tees @ 6,332 aren't rated for women. It's stupid, but I think it is partly due to the existence of both a Kansas Golf Assoc. and a Kansas Womens Golf Assoc. Apparently they look at things somewhat differently.

[Tom Huckaby]

KM:

The two associations don't apparently look at things differently, they absolutely do so.  Women's ratings are done differently from men's, using slightly different methodology.  John VanderBorght can describe the differences for sure.  I don't know - NCGA only does men's ratings.

I'd guess this isn't very commonly known... men's and women's ratings, and thus handicaps, are calculated and computed differently.

But again, it's up to the course as to what tees are rated and by whom.  If the course you play isn't rated for tees you like to play, tell them so... all they need do is ask the golf association....

TH

[Ken Moum]

KM:

The two associations don't apparently look at things differently, they absolutely do so.  Women's ratings are done differently from men's, using slightly different methodology.  John VanderBorght can describe the differences for sure.  I don't know - NCGA only does men's ratings.

I know the criteria are different. I was referring to politics that cause them to stay away from each others "turf," as it were.

[Tom Huckaby]

I'd guess that such politics might exist... though there's no reason they have to.  Tees are tees.  I'm guessing the assumptions though are we don't rate the front tees unless asked, they don't rate the backs unless asked - the real reason being it's overkill given so few men play front, so few women play back - but perhaps turf politics do play into it also.  Again JV would likely have some experiential input....

[Jordan Wall]

Tom,

The way I see it the reason that front tees should be rated is because a course should be interesting and strategic from every set of tees, thus making it a very good course at the least.

Would you agree?

[Glenn Spencer]

Not necessarily, Jordan. It depends on who is playing the front tees. If you are driving it 280 from there, then it would all be down to the greens. You will have wedge or chip shot every time. I imagine the architect is not planning for the equivalent of 370 yard drives. It would only be interesting if you kept hitting driver. For me, it would be like playing half the golf course, I would just hit irons all day. I would think, anyway.

[Tom Huckaby]

Jordan:

I agree with the concept that if tees were rated, more men might play them.

But then again, maybe not.

In any case, all a course has to do is ask.

TH

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()