[Sean_A]

Throw out the whole pro thing and majors for this thread.  For argument's sake, lets stick to handicap golfers - say +2 to 24.  When is a course ott?   I am leaning toward:

1. When a 4 ball of 18 cappers playing steadily can't get round in 3.5 hours - this leaves room for non-steady players to get round in 4 hours - tee hee.  Okay, so there needs to be two standards, one for a proper walking course and for modern walking course (otherwise known as a cart course). 

2. When it is common for a 4 ball to lose 6+ balls a round - though this sounds very high!!! 

3.  When a 4 ball must stop to look for a ball(s) on 43 holes per round.   

What say you folks?  It doesn't have to be in terms in of looking for balls/time, but for me this is systematic of courses being too difficult. 

Ciao

[John Moore II]

Sean- I see where you are coming from. There certainly needs to be different standards for pace of play. Courses built through housing developments might not be difficult courses at all, but since there may be some substantial distances from green to tee, the course takes a long time to get around, especially if you are walking. Terrain has a bit to do with it as well. Certainly with links courses, there is only subtle elevation change. But with inland courses, there can be some very substantial elevation changes, several hundred feet in many cases. That slows down play as well. So, by itself, pace of play is not an indicator of an overly difficult golf course.

I think difficulty is a combination of a lot of factors. Take Pinehurst #2 for example. A 4ball might not lose a single ball and might never have to look for a single ball. And certainly the course is routed in such a way that it is easy to walk. But each golfer in the group is liable to take 3 or 4 shots after they get within 25 yards of the green. Does that make #2 overly difficult?

And what kind of course are we talking about in general? Private, public, resort? Because I'd bet the members at a place like Oakmont get around somewhat quickly even though that course is considered to be a brute. Yet, as we've heard for the last few days from Matt on another thread, it takes upwards of 6 hours to get around Bethpage Black, and the Black may or may not be as difficult numerically as Oakmont. However, they cater to different people. Oakmont is a members club and the Black is a public club open to anyone with a few dollars.

It all has to come together. As a public course, the Black is probably too difficult; as a members course, it likely wouldn't be.

Just for arguements sake, how long does it take a group of foreign golfers to get around The Old Course or Carnoustie?

[Sean_A]

John

Left to their own devices, I think many foreigners would spend all day on TOC - and why not?  The marshals are fairly militant around the TOC, I think in high summer those playing late morning/early afternoon finish in 4.5ish hours.  This of course partially negates my idea of slow play being impacted by course design, because there is no reason in the world it should take 4.5 hours to play TOC - except its TOC and on a nice day there aren't many other places golfers want to be.  Carnoustie on the other hand is too tough and the degree of difficulty impacts the speed of play.   

Ciao

[David_Madison]

A course is too difficult when it's just not any fun for the vast majority of golfers to play, even when they play shorter tees that otherwise would be appropriate for their ability. It can be lost balls because the fairways are too narrow and rough too high, or because hazards pinch in making the playing areas too small. Whacky, overly fast greens where even good putters take 40+ putts per round can do it. All that will result in slower rounds, but the slower rounds by themselves don't make the course too hard. Bottom line - when almost everyone walking off the course feels beat up, with little positive results for their efforts even on shots they executed pretty well, and where you want to go and take a nap rather than feeling energized from your round, that's too hard.

[Melvyn Morrow]

Sean

Interesting topic, but is there ever a course that is too difficult. Challenging, yes but difficult?

I would suggest that the word ‘difficulty’ when defined to the average golfer is more related to the mental and physical state of said golfer on the day the words was used to describe the course.

I have played many a course over the years, yet a reasonable number have at times been challenging, not in a difficult sense but more along the lines of a marathon. Reasons can vary from the numbers playing, the weather, the general course condition, my own mental and physical state, etc, etc. Nevertheless can I put that down to the course being difficult, in honest truth I do not feel I can.

My rounds have not been improved because of speed either, yes it has been made frustration on the few occasions when not been allowed to play through slower groups, but that’s just a question of common courtesy gone adrift (last experienced was I believe at Dornoch a few Years ago). From memory I would go as far as to say that in my experience the 4.5 hour round has thankfully been very rare in my experience, perhaps that may be down to being more selective as I get older preferring to stay clear of the many – what I call ‘Open Course’ (which attract overseas visitors), which usually results in a more relaxed round. But then golf is not all about winning but taken part and in so doing enjoying the experience.

So your word difficult describes the state of mind and well being that I find myself upon waking each day (presuming I managed any sleep). The word difficult is in the mind, whilst the word challenging is actually being able to get out of bed and face the day whatever ones mood.

Today so far has been challenging but no doubt will get difficult as it goes on as no golf for this lad today.       

Melvyn

PS If we all honoured our golfing etiquette would that make a difference, I believe it would as we need to see more courtesy and consideration on the course minimising difficulty while saving time on a round. There that was not too difficult, thanks for making me think about the issue.
   

[Bill_McBride]

Melvyn's post raises the possibility that a course is too difficult if a group can't get around in a reasonable time even while exercising the best etiquette.

[Jim_Kennedy]

.....when the scores of a sizeable portion of the playing population are higher than their largest differentials, even after repeat plays.

[Melvyn Morrow]

Bill

You said
Melvyn's post raises the possibility that a course is too difficult if a group can't get around in a reasonable time even while exercising the best etiquette

With respect I feel you have me wrong, I am saying we need etiquette more so now than ever before. Perhaps with more consideration we might have a fast round and more enjoyment. One reason for my stance against poor course conduct.

The real challenge is getting up (in the morning for some) and facing it full on from the start
As for difficult, I think I mentioned that’s in the mind while challenging is farm more tangible.

Or are just joking with me

Melvyn

[Sean_A]

I raise the subject because I am starting to struggle to play the "bigger" courses in 4 hours as part of a 4ball.  I don't lose many balls and play to an 8 cap, but I am a slow walker.  Granted, sometimes - perhaps often - there are slower players in the group.  Often times these slow guys make up ground by walking fast.  I HATE walking fast, so I end up breaking "code" by walking up the wings with arm over irons to "keep up" quitely.  I am sure some folks don't appreciate this behaviour, but I feel as though I will lag if I don't walk ahead.  Thankfully, I do not find it difficult to play in 3.5 hours at the more user friendly courses which aren't difficult, but are still challenging and often times charming.  They are the sort at which a player of my calibre can shoot par on his day.  

I can understand the non-architectural aspects of golf which slow golf down - such as my slow walking, but I do believe good design leads to quicker play regardless of fiddly player issues.

Ciao

[Melvyn Morrow]

Sean

Hence the need (urgently IMHO) to renew what course etiquette is about - consideration for others. Its being forgotten or put on the back burner.

AS for walking speed I agree unless always down hill is hard to calculate for it and hence the importance of normal play once at the ball/Green - IMHO this is where the problem needs to be tackled/resolved.

Melvyn

[Tom_Doak]

Sean:

In America we would tend toward deciding a course is too difficult when people stop wanting to play it.

Of course, those who like that particular course would attribute different reasons for the same result.

I think that for the most part, slow play is a result of PEOPLE not golf courses.  Carnoustie is uber-difficult, yet the Scots used to play it comfortably in three hours [albeit, not from the "tips", as some Americans would insist].

[cary lichtenstein]

A course is too difficult when you can't wait for the round to end soon enough. When it severly penalizes less than perfect shots. When the rough is "sand wedge only", when shots that hit greens are not in the right quadrant are routinely rejected by the green into some colledtion area.

[Bill_McBride]

Bill

You said
Melvyn's post raises the possibility that a course is too difficult if a group can't get around in a reasonable time even while exercising the best etiquette

With respect I feel you have me wrong, I am saying we need etiquette more so now than ever before. Perhaps with more consideration we might have a fast round and more enjoyment. One reason for my stance against poor course conduct.

The real challenge is getting up (in the morning for some) and facing it full on from the start
As for difficult, I think I mentioned that’s in the mind while challenging is farm more tangible.

Or are just joking with me

Melvyn

Melvyn, I was effectively agreeing with you, [as usual], what I meant was that a course may be too difficult -- forced carries, deep rough, whatever -- if a group observing all the accepted rules of etiquette can't get around it in an acceptable amount of time.  This means they would be spending an inordinate amount of time searching for balls, playing provisionals, etc etc.

[Scott Warren]

Left to their own devices, I think many foreigners would spend all day on TOC - and why not?  The marshals are fairly militant around the TOC, I think in high summer those playing late morning/early afternoon finish in 4.5ish hours.  This of course partially negates my idea of slow play being impacted by course design, because there is no reason in the world it should take 4.5 hours to play TOC

I teed off on a busy mid-week day last summer at 11.50am and we walked off 18 at 3.55pm and we had marshalls politely jockeying us the whole way.

If you took 4h30 I suspect they would have something stronger than a quiet word with you.

[Jud_T]

Sean,

By your definition, which I admit has some merit, a number of the vaunted top 100 stateside courses are too difficult....

[Jeff_Brauer]

Great question.

I think from the average golfer's perspective (in the range of handicaps you suggested) I really think it centers on lost balls and multiple attempts to recover.  That is, hit it in a bunker or rough and find yourself hacking endlessly just to get back out on the fw, etc.  What is the old saying about only God can deal out more punishment than one stroke penalty?

Thus, courses with too much water, too deep rough (which is easily controlled, IMHO), too much native area, and yes, unraked bunkers or soft sand that allows plugged lies, just gets too hard for the average player to contend with.  I would add highly contoured greens, but golfers will always concede the third or at least fourth putt, just because they hate to see grown men cry.

[Sean_A]

Sean:

In America we would tend toward deciding a course is too difficult when people stop wanting to play it.

Of course, those who like that particular course would attribute different reasons for the same result.

I think that for the most part, slow play is a result of PEOPLE not golf courses.  Carnoustie is uber-difficult, yet the Scots used to play it comfortably in three hours [albeit, not from the "tips", as some Americans would insist].

Tom

I am not trying to set up an either/or situation between design and golfers.  I chose to focus on the architecture because they way I see it, people walk away from because of lsow play, but I don't see a lot of initiative from archies/developers to build more user friendly courses.  I am sure part of my not seeing a lot of initiative is that I don't get to see many of the "local" courses.  Instead, I usually see courses of some repute.  Even so, I have to wonder if the drive for top whatever status doesn't contribute to less user friendly courses.  Its hard for me to see the dichotomy of top 100 and user friendly ever walking hand in han with any sort of consistency.

Ciao

[Melvyn Morrow]

Sean

In my time I have been limited to local courses and so have decided not to play others of repute as you say - what a drag at times . So alone or nearly alone I was forced to accept the likes of TOC, the New Course, Jubilee and Eden, I struggle to be happy and was forced to continue to use these courses unlike you in your selection of reputable courses, 0h you lucky bugger.

Difficult, not really but challenging yes from the start to the finish, not forgetting the setting adds to that feeling of ease and comfort which set the golfers mind at rest. Although the 1st Tee on TOC can be fun subject to numbers.

The problem is The Golfers, not the design or the designers as clearly that has worked well on the above courses for more than just a few years. The problem lies with the education or perhaps the lack of serious induction of the new golfer to the game.  Really what can we expect if we do not explain how the game is played, we reap the harvest we have failed to plant on prepared ground. There I go again Mr Doak - land fit for purpose.

Yes it’s the golfers fault but then again its not as they have had no real induction into the game.

No lessons I can understand but no basic induction into how the game is played and points to note, no that is a failing IMHO.

Melvyn

[Matt_Ward]

One of the reasons that's been ignored -- when golfers (likely those wannabee types) who think they have game and then proceed to play from tee positions that frankly have little or no success for them to even attempt.

Plenty of these types suffer from "blue-tee-itis." It's an affliction in which people think they can play the game well but then when they step to the rear tee positions they find out differently. Of course, the lament at the 19th hole is that the course is too difficult.

[Niall C]

John

Left to their own devices, I think many foreigners would spend all day on TOC - and why not?  The marshals are fairly militant around the TOC, I think in high summer those playing late morning/early afternoon finish in 4.5ish hours.  This of course partially negates my idea of slow play being impacted by course design, because there is no reason in the world it should take 4.5 hours to play TOC - except its TOC and on a nice day there aren't many other places golfers want to be.  Carnoustie on the other hand is too tough and the degree of difficulty impacts the speed of play.   

Ciao

Sean

Lets imagine that you cut across to the 12th after finishing the 9th at Carnoustie so that you only played 16 holes, and that you managed to go round in under 4 hours. Would the course be too hard then ? Is it the total length of time playing that is the annoyance or is it the amount of lost balls ?

In my experience its not the worst course for losing balls.

Niall

[Tim Nugent]

A golf course is too difficult when youo are asked to perform beyond your abilities.  Go find an easier one.  If no one can perfom on it, it will cease to exist.

[Sean_A]

John

Left to their own devices, I think many foreigners would spend all day on TOC - and why not?  The marshals are fairly militant around the TOC, I think in high summer those playing late morning/early afternoon finish in 4.5ish hours.  This of course partially negates my idea of slow play being impacted by course design, because there is no reason in the world it should take 4.5 hours to play TOC - except its TOC and on a nice day there aren't many other places golfers want to be.  Carnoustie on the other hand is too tough and the degree of difficulty impacts the speed of play.   

Ciao

Sean

Lets imagine that you cut across to the 12th after finishing the 9th at Carnoustie so that you only played 16 holes, and that you managed to go round in under 4 hours. Would the course be too hard then ? Is it the total length of time playing that is the annoyance or is it the amount of lost balls ?

In my experience its not the worst course for losing balls.

Niall

Niall

Okay, if we are talking 16 hole courses, Carnoustie is too tough. 

I am not drawing any unreasonable conclusions.  The tougher a course is, the longer it takes to play.  I merely focused on the amount of time to play as a symptom of a tough course - in some cases - too tough - and I would also say this is a more modern trend for the most part.  I know many point to "in the old days" guys got round in 3 hours.  That may be, but I also think in the old days 4 ball golf was less common than it is today. 

Ciao

[John Moore II]

One of the reasons that's been ignored -- when golfers (likely those wannabee types) who think they have game and then proceed to play from tee positions that frankly have little or no success for them to even attempt.

Plenty of these types suffer from "blue-tee-itis." It's an affliction in which people think they can play the game well but then when they step to the rear tee positions they find out differently. Of course, the lament at the 19th hole is that the course is too difficult.

Matt, I think you have the real winner there. No course is too difficult is played from the proper set of tees. Even courses that have 6 sets of tees have this problem. People have too much pride or whatever to play a more forward set of tees. Even if they 3rd set of tees up is still 7000 yards, they'll play there and have no chance at all. And (no offense) Asian people are the worst at this. They will play from the back tees, be damned if they take 8 hours to finish, go through 7 dozen balls and shoot 292 each among the 4 ball on an 8500 yard course. Thats what takes so long.

[Sean_A]

One of the reasons that's been ignored -- when golfers (likely those wannabee types) who think they have game and then proceed to play from tee positions that frankly have little or no success for them to even attempt.

Plenty of these types suffer from "blue-tee-itis." It's an affliction in which people think they can play the game well but then when they step to the rear tee positions they find out differently. Of course, the lament at the 19th hole is that the course is too difficult.

Matt, I think you have the real winner there. No course is too difficult is played from the proper set of tees. Even courses that have 6 sets of tees have this problem. People have too much pride or whatever to play a more forward set of tees. Even if they 3rd set of tees up is still 7000 yards, they'll play there and have no chance at all. And (no offense) Asian people are the worst at this. They will play from the back tees, be damned if they take 8 hours to finish, go through 7 dozen balls and shoot 292 each among the 4 ball on an 8500 yard course. Thats what takes so long.

Geez - I wish guys would stop with the sweeping generalizations about large groups of people - someone could have a mind to call it discrimination.  I know it sometimes feels like a locker room round here, but this locker room has Lesbians, Asians and all sorts dropping in so it is best to keep yer troozers on if you know what I mean. 

Ciao 

[John Moore II]

One of the reasons that's been ignored -- when golfers (likely those wannabee types) who think they have game and then proceed to play from tee positions that frankly have little or no success for them to even attempt.

Plenty of these types suffer from "blue-tee-itis." It's an affliction in which people think they can play the game well but then when they step to the rear tee positions they find out differently. Of course, the lament at the 19th hole is that the course is too difficult.

Matt, I think you have the real winner there. No course is too difficult is played from the proper set of tees. Even courses that have 6 sets of tees have this problem. People have too much pride or whatever to play a more forward set of tees. Even if they 3rd set of tees up is still 7000 yards, they'll play there and have no chance at all. And (no offense) Asian people are the worst at this. They will play from the back tees, be damned if they take 8 hours to finish, go through 7 dozen balls and shoot 292 each among the 4 ball on an 8500 yard course. Thats what takes so long.

Geez - I wish guys would stop with the sweeping generalizations about large groups of people - someone could have a mind to call it discrimination.  I know it sometimes feels like a locker room round here, but this locker room has Lesbians, Asians and all sorts dropping in so it is best to keep yer troozers on if you know what I mean. 

Ciao 

I just call it like I see it. You ask anyone who is in the golf business and they will tell you that is the truth, unless you have a starter on the first tee forcing guys to move up. All people do it, but in my years in the business, I have seen Asians do it far, far more than others.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()