What turns people off to a golf course?

[Rob Rigg]

- Most people get annoyed if they can't hit driver off the tee on two and three shot holes
- Most people get annoyed if they lose a dozen golf balls due to OB or Water Hazards
- Most people don't get annoyed if it is carts only but I do - at least a choice in the matter please
- Most people get annoyed if they drop $75+ and a course is not "Augusta Green"
- Most people get annoyed if it is too windy
- Most people get annoyed if greens are too slow or too undulating
- Most people get annoyed if bunkers are not raked and easy to escape from

[Joe Hancock]

Chuck: if the course was free to play, but took 6 hours and was terribly difficult, would anyone really come to play?

You could highlight any of the negatives this way. For instance, if the course only took three hours to play and reasonably fun, would you pay $400 to play it?

The ironic part of all this is that the few courses that are well done, fun, inexpensive and of reasonable pace don't seem worth a special trip in most cases. Bandon Dunes gets the special trip treatment. Wild Horse does not, even though many see it while on their way to special trip-worthy Sand Hills. The Mines is all of the positives, yet because it isn't high maintenance or remarkable in other ways, it isn't of special trip caliber. Nice stop on the way to Crystal Downs or Kingsley though.

We talk the talk a lot here, but in the end it takes a certain combination to make us travel to play special courses....and almost always, it has at least one of the negatives attached to it.

Joe

[John Moore II]

But Joe, in general, I don't think we are talking about "special trip" golf courses. We're more looking at what makes "bad" courses bad. And I think what I outlined pretty much describes what makes courses not so good, or what would make people think they are not so good.

[Joe Hancock]

JKM,

I may have strayed a bit, but I think bad courses are bad for all the reasons you and I listed, and then some.

Point taken, however.

Joe

[Jim Tang]

-Crazy big clubhouses. You know half your green fee is going towad paying for the clubhouse.  I'll take Kingsley's clubhouse any day.
-Man made waterfalls.
-Green fees that are well over $100 but the pro shop still charges you $5 for range balls.  Just add the range fee into the green fee.
-Long, unatural lines on a golf course.  I thought I would love TPC at Sawgrass-Stadium. But, when I played it, I just couldn't get past the geometric shape of the bunkers.  
-Unwalkable layouts or courses where walking is not permitted.
-The dreaded CPO = Cart Path Only
-Par 3's that all play from similar distances
-Houses lining the majority of the holes

[Rob_Waldron]

Jeff

You may not like my explanation but you will probably appreciate it.

I believe one of the greatest turnoffs is the course setup. An owner can invest millions and an Architect can put his heart and sole into a course only to have a Superintendent turn over the course setup to unqualified lowly employee who does not even play golf. I cannot count the number of times I play courses with tee markers in well worn areas pointed to the trees as opposed to the target. Then you get to the green which is stimping at a maddening 6 feet with a cup located at the base of a severe slope. These types of situations ruin the day for the average golfer and make a lasting impression about the course.

I recently played a one of the Jack Nicklaus designed courses at The Cliffs. The members warned me about how terrible the greens were designed and how much the membership hated the course and generally preferred to play the other Cliffs courses. When I got to the first green a noticed the typical Nicklaus multi tiered putting surfaces requiring approach shots to the proper level. However then I noticed the pin position about two feet onto the top slope. Any putts from behind the hole tended to advance down the hill to the lwere levels. Sure the greens in general were difficult but poor pin placements made them next to impossible. I provided my comments to the Pro and he agreed that the course is the least favored among the members. Well do something about it!  

[Kari Haug]

 I really liked RJ Daley's reply to this question and would agree with most all points made.  Also, I think a course that has too many blind shots for the first time visitor would turn people off (unless one takes a caddie.)  Making blind shots limits the effect of charm and challenge and disorients people, creating a feeling of discomfort.  Nobody likes feeling lost, it limits our ability to feel confident about making a shot.  The boldness it takes to make the decision to go for clearing a hazard feels much different (better) than stepping onto the tee, flying it out there, and just hoping it ends up okay.   I also agree that unattainable forced carries are a bummer.

[Joe Hancock]

Rob Waldron,

Shame on the super, owner and operator if they have "unqualified, lowly employees" on site at all. It's the leadership at fault in those circumstances. And, likely an innocent but poor description of employees on your part.

Joe

[John Moore II]

Kelly-you are correct, no one would be able to walk up to Oakmont and not know something of its stature. And your example of Tobacco Road, while good, doesn't really capture what I was shooting for. You are different from the average golfer. Tobacco Road has the "wow" factor as well, lots of it. And that 'wow' hits you from the first tee and really doesn't stop (actually, it hits you on the drive up to the clubhouse when you see 14 and the tee shot on 18). Without that "wow" that people get from TR, it would just be another course that beats people's brains out. And not highly enjoyable to play. Thats what I am looking at: what would the average golfer think of a course? What goes through their mind? And most golfers, if they walked off 18, felt like they played decent golf but shot 10-15 shots higher than normal would probably say it was a poor design and a poor golf course.

[Adrian_Stiff]

-Crazy big clubhouses. You know half your green fee is going towad paying for the clubhouse.  I'll take Kingsley's clubhouse any day.
-Man made waterfalls.
-Green fees that are well over $100 but the pro shop still charges you $5 for range balls.  Just add the range fee into the green fee.
-Long, unatural lines on a golf course.  I thought I would love TPC at Sawgrass-Stadium. But, when I played it, I just couldn't get past the geometric shape of the bunkers.  
-Unwalkable layouts or courses where walking is not permitted.
-The dreaded CPO = Cart Path Only
-Par 3's that all play from similar distances
-Houses lining the majority of the holes

I dont think these points would be a turn off to the majority. I think the majority really like the big clubhouses, waterfalls, geometric bunkers, carts, they probably dont even focus on houses.

[John Moore II]

-Crazy big clubhouses. You know half your green fee is going towad paying for the clubhouse.  I'll take Kingsley's clubhouse any day.
-Man made waterfalls.
-Green fees that are well over $100 but the pro shop still charges you $5 for range balls.  Just add the range fee into the green fee.
-Long, unatural lines on a golf course.  I thought I would love TPC at Sawgrass-Stadium. But, when I played it, I just couldn't get past the geometric shape of the bunkers.  
-Unwalkable layouts or courses where walking is not permitted.
-The dreaded CPO = Cart Path Only
-Par 3's that all play from similar distances
-Houses lining the majority of the holes

I have to agree with Adrian here, most of those things are not going to turn off the majority of golfers, especially not the average golfer. And how many of the average American golfers really care about walking? They ride carts everywhere and probably won't play a course that wouldn't let them ride. Same with houses, they only reason they may not like the houses is that the yards are OB. Yeah, much of what you list here would be of no consequence to the average American golfer, in fact, much of it, like big clubhouses and waterfalls might actually make the average golfer think the course was cooler.

[Rob_Waldron]

Joe

Just how qualified are most cup cutters? I call em as I see em. Sad but true.

On the other hand I went to a course where the Pro told me that every cupping position was pre-approved by either the Super or the Pro. Unfortunately there are Supers who do not follow up on the work of their staffs. It becomes rather embarrassing to the PRo when members come storming the golf shop after a round of mis-guided pin placements.

[Adrian_Stiff]

Joe

Just how qualified are most cup cutters? I call em as I see em. Sad but true.

On the other hand I went to a course where the Pro told me that every cupping position was pre-approved by either the Super or the Pro. Unfortunately there are Supers who do not follow up on the work of their staffs. It becomes rather embarrassing to the PRo when members come storming the golf shop after a round of mis-guided pin placements.

Most 'cup cutters' are the more experienced of the grounds crew, every club and every greenskeeper has cut a bad one but by and large they make good calls  where to put the pins, you must remember for non competition play they may need to use more unusual areas so as to keep the better places for something up and coming.

[Joe Hancock]

Rob,

The pro and the super and whoever else is ultimately responsible need to help out that cup cutter then. If the cup cutter is unqualified, it's a management issue, not a laborer issue.

Joe

[Adrian_Stiff]

Rob,

The pro and the super and whoever else is ultimately responsible need to help out that cup cutter then. If the cup cutter is unqualified, it's a management issue, not a laborer issue.

Joe

Joe- Its the Super's responsibiity ultimately. I dont really know what you mean by unqualified, unqualified in cup cutting? Cutting and changing hole is fairly basic as an operation, for important events the hole position would be 'pre spotted' perhaps by a tournament official and perhaps with the Super.

[Will Smith]

Just to clarify a post by Jonathan Cummings, the lead design associate at Common Ground was Eric Iverson, while Jim Urbina and Don Placeck, both of who have long ties to the Denver area, made significant contributions. Jim and the whole team have every reason to be proud of the project.

[Jonathan Cummings]

Okay Will - since we're correcting folks here.  I have in front of me Tom Doak's announcement card on Common Ground (photo on front by Larry Lambrecht).

It says.

"co-designers: Eric Iverson, Don Placek & Jim Urbina."

I think Doak and clan are getting away from the term "lead associate".

I played with Jim Urbina at The Renaissance Cup this past summer.  He had spent so much time at CG that that was the first time he had seen Renaissance Club!

JC

[Kyle Harris]

Wow, there sure are a lot of cup cutters out there that cut holes smaller than stipulated in the rules for all these cries of "unfair."

[Jeff_Brauer]

I know when I put myself through college working at Glencoe near Chicago, they used to put me in charge of cutting cups. Generally, cup cutting was seen as the least skilled job and thus relegated to the summer help, but they did appreciate that i was a golfer and knew a little bit about what was good and bad.

So, while cups get cut in bad locations sometimes, anyone who thinks supers don't pay attention to something that they will hear complaints about must not think too much about superintendents, now, do they?

[Kye Goalby]

Jonathan,

I believe Jimmy Urbina did Common Ground.  It's right in his back yard and Tom was off (mostly in Scotland) during the Common Ground redo.  I had lunch and dinner with Jim last summer and he is quite proud of CG.  JC

To join with Will Smith in  trying to add a little more fact to your post concerning Tom Doak's CommonGround and Renaissance Club -  I worked a long time at The Renaissance Club and also at CommonGround  during the first month or so of its construction, and they were not overlapping projects.  

The Renaissance Club was basically completed and seeded by October 2006.  CommonGround did not start construction until the fall of 2007.   So,  I don't think Tom's time was  being occupied by the Scotland project during construction of Commonground.  If anything,  during the first half  of 2008, while CommonGround was being finished, Tom ( and Jim Urbina too) would have been constructing the first group of holes at Old Macdonald.

I am sure  it would be most accurate if Tom or Jim could gave  exact details of this,  but having some first hand knowledge, and seeing  the monumental arguments  on this site  about  who was where and who did what on courses built 80 and 90 years ago, I figure getting  true and accurate information on courses built 2 or 3 years ago might be of some value in the future!

[Richard Choi]

My criteria is pretty simple...

1. Pace of Play!!! Any place where it is impossible for me to play under 4 1/2 hour (especially in the early weekend morning) does not get my business. This is by FAR the most important criteria and dwarfs all others.

2. Value. I am fine with playing on a course with less than ideal architectural value, as long as it is priced accordingly.

That is about it. I will play anywhere as long as they fit the criteria.

[Steve_ Shaffer]

For public courses:

1. Degree of difficulty
2. Slow play reputation
3. Poor Conditioning
4. Cost

1&2 go hand in hand.

[Steve Lang]

  

I think a course being "tricked up" is the most frustrating "turn-off", i.e.,when the perception is that a well struck shot is not rewarded.. challenge is thus how to communicate or expose what would be a well struck shot..

I know some players that are "tee ballers", they literally demand to hit driver on every tee, else the course is lacking.. or they don't want a course that demands or allows boring "shotmaking" .. its all about long shots off the tee, how lofted a club is used for approach..  they easily fall prey to "Paul Runyan" style golf..

[David Lott]

It's pretty simple:

1. Lack of cordial greeting or disorganization on arrival.
2. Slow play.
3. Greens in poor condition, soggy overwatered ground or other obvious inattention to basic (not pristine) conditioning.
4. Holes with improbable or impossible carries and no alternative route.
5. Sameness and repetition of holes.
6. Pretention or cluelessness (My favorite example: Secession, naming its holes after the bloodiest and most brutal battles in American history.)

The architectural merit isn't that important. A pleasant day of golf is achievable on any well managed course.

[David Lott]

Forgot to mention cart path only.