What's wrong with fast?

[Garland Bayley]

On an earlier thread about slow play, I commented that a high handicap buddy and I play our home course together in 2 hours. I, of course, was trying to counter all those who want to blame high handicappers for slow play.

What surprised me was the negative reaction I got about it being a meaningless exercise to play that fast, and that there can be no value in playing that fast.

Last night I read a report that said Gene Sarazen and George Fazio were paired in the first pairing at the Masters in 1947. It said that Gene shot a 70 at Augusta National while the pair of them finished their round in 1 hour and 57 minutes.

Sorry guys. I'll take The Squire's idea of proper pace over yours.

[Zack Kelly]

I strongly agree just b/c you play fast doesn't mean you can't enjoy your round.  And in my opinion the faster you play the more you get to play, which in my world is key.

[Tommy Williamsen]

I like to play quickly.  My buddy and I can get around in two and a hold hours.  I don't feel as though we are rushing at all.  We just don't grind over every shot or stalk every putt. Neither do we stand still while the other is hitting.  It doesn't work so well when we have another person with us.  But it works for us. I also agree that it allows us to play 18 have lunch and play 18 more and be finished in six hours.

[JESII]

Garland,

I thought it was the low handicappers that slowed everything down by taking too much time on each shot...

I like to play as fast as possible, but the guys in front of me rarely play fast enough...

[Jim_Kennedy]

Garland,
To each his own as to how fast they like to play. There's  
nothing wrong with being the quickest rabbit on the course, as long as you aren't a bother to the rest of the golfers.  
 

[Garland Bayley]

Garland,
To each his own as to how fast they like to play. There's  
nothing wrong with being the quickest rabbit on the course, as long as you aren't a bother to the rest of the golfers.  
 

And here I thought it was the slower golfers that were supposed to be the bother.  

[Joe Hancock]

There was an old cosmetic or hair product advert from the 80's or 90's, in which the model says something like:

"Don't hate me because I'm beautiful..."

This reminds me of that.

Joe

[Dan Kelly]

There was an old cosmetic or hair product advert from the 80's or 90's, in which the model says something like:

"Don't hate me because I'm beautiful..."

Joe --

The Internet is the most amazing place, ever.

See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hz8ul-gmLyA

And: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=phnbv19YLh8&feature=related

What a revelation. I didn't even know my wife had done any modeling!

Dan

[Sean_A]

Garland

2 hours is fine, but its too fast for me.  There is nothing I hate more than to feel rushed - I just don't walk that fast.  Like my dad said, if you need to catch a train don't play golf.  I need time to fire up a cigar and enjoy.  As I am not worried about getting in 36 (there is always tomorrow) I like about 2.75 hours for a 2 ball and 3.5 for a 4 ball.  

Ciao

[Lloyd_Cole]

Garland,
To each his own as to how fast they like to play. There's  
nothing wrong with being the quickest rabbit on the course, as long as you aren't a bother to the rest of the golfers.  
 

Jim

If you have a group behind pressing you and there is a group on the hole ahead, then they are fools, or worse. If however the hole ahead is free, you should let them through. That's not being bothersome, it's the rules.
The single player pressing the group ahead should treated like the ass he is. I play alone quite often, but if I get stuck, and there is nowhere else on the course to jump across to, I try very hard to be invisible. We played a 2 ball tournament last year at Worthigton, MA, and a member decided to come out to play alone. Frankly the pro should have sent him home. A 2 ball is pretty slow as it is often 4 ball strokeplay... this idiot stood leaning on his club wating to hit, visibly sighing with indignation. Like we were ruining his day. The inexperienced group behind us had actually waved him through. Did he expect to be waved through all ten groups?

[Lloyd_Cole]

Garland

2 hours is fine, but its too fast for me.  There is nothing I hate more than to feel rushed - I just don't walk that fast.  Like my dad said, if you need to catch a train don't play golf.  I need time to fire up a cigar and enjoy.  As I am not worried about getting in 36 (there is always tomorrow) I like about 2.75 hours for a 2 ball and 3.5 for a 4 ball.  

Ciao

Sean

You know full well that that pace would get you on the US Olympic speed golf team.

[Marty Bonnar]

Garland

2 hours is fine, but its too fast for me.  There is nothing I hate more than to feel rushed - I just don't walk that fast.  Like my dad said, if you need to catch a train don't play golf.  I need time to fire up a cigar and enjoy.  As I am not worried about getting in 36 (there is always tomorrow) I like about 2.75 hours for a 2 ball and 3.5 for a 4 ball.  

Ciao

Sean

You know full well that that pace would get you on the US Olympic speed golf team.

I'm not certain, but I think amphetamines are still banned by the IOC?

Mind you, there's a couple of members at BPGC who I'd be happy to supply...

F.

[Sean_A]

Garland

2 hours is fine, but its too fast for me.  There is nothing I hate more than to feel rushed - I just don't walk that fast.  Like my dad said, if you need to catch a train don't play golf.  I need time to fire up a cigar and enjoy.  As I am not worried about getting in 36 (there is always tomorrow) I like about 2.75 hours for a 2 ball and 3.5 for a 4 ball.  

Ciao

Sean

You know full well that that pace would get you on the US Olympic speed golf team.

Lloyd

You think so?  I really am a slooooow walker.  I have to cheat by walking up the wings and other sneaky deals as others hit.

I really dread moving back to the States and being confined to public golf.  On my last trip to NC I walked off two courses after 9.  Man, the pace of play is slow.  I consider myself to be fairly slow so I find it difficult to understand what people do to take 4.5 hours to play.  It was such a contrast at Old Town.  We went round comfortably in 3 hours taking pix and re-hitting shots.  Millionaires golf it was.

Lloyd

I think the R&A has now dropped its discriminatory recommendations concerning singles.  They are no long the scabs of the course.  Though I must admit that I am happy to let a single through.  If its quite clear to me that any group behind is significantly quicker than ours, I will invite them through regardless of what is happening ahead.  Much more often than not, they will refuse, knowing the reality.  However, at least I know I can't be blamed for holding them up.

Ciao

[Tom Huckaby]

Sean:

Not that you would ever contemplate such, but do NOT move to California.

4.5 hours here is speed-demon fast.

Typical weekend rounds at the beloved and be-hated Santa Teresa take a minimum of 5.5 hours.

And what do people do to make 18 holes last this long?

I'll tell you what I do:  I sit and wait... and wait.. and wait... and wait....

It's all a matter of too many golfers on the course.  Set me loose with no one in front of me and your requested times are the norm.

So Garland, don't let anyone tell you you are going too fast, although your claims do sound exaggerated to me if you routinely play 18 in two hours!  But too fast is ALWAYS going to be better than too slow.

TH

[Garland Bayley]

...We played a 2 ball tournament last year at Worthigton, MA, and a member decided to come out to play alone. Frankly the pro should have sent him home. A 2 ball is pretty slow as it is often 4 ball strokeplay...

I don't get it. Why are there 4 balls in a 2 ball tournament?

[Lloyd_Cole]

Garland

2 hours is fine, but its too fast for me.  There is nothing I hate more than to feel rushed - I just don't walk that fast.  Like my dad said, if you need to catch a train don't play golf.  I need time to fire up a cigar and enjoy.  As I am not worried about getting in 36 (there is always tomorrow) I like about 2.75 hours for a 2 ball and 3.5 for a 4 ball.  

Ciao

Sean

You know full well that that pace would get you on the US Olympic speed golf team.

Lloyd

You think so?  I really am a slooooow walker.  I have to cheat by walking up the wings and other sneaky deals as others hit.

I really dread moving back to the States and being confined to public golf.  On my last trip to NC I walked off two courses after 9.  Man, the pace of play is slow.  I consider myself to be fairly slow so I find it difficult to understand what people do to take 4.5 hours to play.  It was such a contrast at Old Town.  We went round comfortably in 3 hours taking pix and re-hitting shots.  Millionaires golf it was.    

Ciao

Sean

Come to Western Massachusetts. Affordable private golf, and if you play your cards right you can play at the pace you like to. We're maybe a tiny bit slower than you. I'm slow over the ball, which is embarrassing (I have alignment issues..) but I walk quickly, at least I used to...

[David Stamm]

The answer to the question, not a damn thing....






Oops! Sorry, I didn't read all of it!

[Pat Brockwell]

There is an absurd article in the Sun Country Golfer (New Mexico and El Paso Section) that makes the case that fast players are as bad as slow ones.  It seems to be driven by a couple of course marshals that are irked by having to do something besides smile, wave and look for lost balls.  Can't we all just take four and a half hours?

[Jim_Kennedy]

Lloyd,
Well, it's not really a rule, but I'm not going to quibble about it, and of course, who here wouldn't let a single or a deuce or any group of faster players through if conditions permit. The point I was trying to make was one you touched upon later in your post, you know, the putz who runs up on the group ahead and makes his presence known, especially when there is no place to go.    
Put any two-hours-for-18-holes twosome on a busy course and they are going to negatively impact the pace of play for every other group out there. Think about it, how much waiting time does a group experience when letting another group pass? Let's just call it one or two minutes, for arguments sake. They'll have to work themselves through at least 17, and probably more, other groups. Add it up and they'll probably have caused the course to slow down by at least 20, but probably more, minutes for everyone else out there.    
Personally, I search out enjoyable courses and play them when I know they will be less crowded(easier to do in our neck of the woods) because I enjoy a brisk pace.  
No doubt, most people could probably pick up the pace, but  the pace that Garland suggests he plays at is a nuisance to everyone else on a busy course.

                                   

[Ken Moum]

There is an absurd article in the Sun Country Golfer (New Mexico and El Paso Section) that makes the case that fast players are as bad as slow ones.  It seems to be driven by a couple of course marshals that are irked by having to do something besides smile, wave and look for lost balls.  Can't we all just take four and a half hours?

I've gotten to the point where even four and half hours seems interminable.

[Donnie Beck]

I think it was our friend Barney who once said "twosomes are social misfits who can't get a game".. I am not sure I agree with that, but I do think twosomes trying to play in 2hrs do more harm than good for the pace of play.

[Pat Brockwell]

Ken, don't get me wrong, I think 4.5 is an hour or so too long.  I just know that marshalls only want to get everyone to go at the SAME pace, not a quick pace.  I played a round where the marshalls actually encouraged us to just take our time and enjoy the day, because they were unable or unwilling to try to get anyone to move along.  Haven't been back there.

[Garland Bayley]

...
No doubt, most people could probably pick up the pace, but  the pace that Garland suggests he plays at is a nuisance to everyone else on a busy course.

                                   

It is not, nor am I a nuisance to anyone on a busy course. You, Jim, simply accept the status quo. The nuisance is the people that think a foursome should take more than four hours to complete a round. If the course were full of foursomes, my buddy and I would be paired with another pair, and if everyone played at a 3.5 hour pace we would not stand out in the least.

[Lloyd_Cole]

Lloyd,
Well, it's not really a rule, but I'm not going to quibble about it,
                                   

Jim

Etiquette is rule 1.

'If a match fails to keep it's place on the course and loses more than one clear hole on the players in front, it should invite the match following to pass.'

[Lloyd_Cole]

Put any two-hours-for-18-holes twosome on a busy course and they are going to negatively impact the pace of play for every other group out there. Think about it, how much waiting time does a group experience when letting another group pass? Let's just call it one or two minutes, for arguments sake. They'll have to work themselves through at least 17, and probably more, other groups. Add it up and they'll probably have caused the course to slow down by at least 20, but probably more, minutes for everyone else out there.    

Jim,

If the course is busy, and there are no open holes to let them through onto, they should not be let through.