[Carl Rogers]

very sensible thread....

par 68 course w/
-6 par 3's
-10 par 4's
-2 par 5's
at 6000 yds it would be as much as 99.9% would need

[Jud_T]

Matt,

If you've ever gone heliskiing, you'd realize that you pay by the amount of verticle feet you want/are able to ski.  more yards equals more dollars.... I also like the idea of charging by speed but that's harder to put into practice...charge any group that's a hole behind an extra $10/man and i'll bet they catch up in a hurry...

[Matt_Ward]

Jud, et al:

I like Shivas response !

Candidly, too many people take on way too much course for their games to handle. The issue is for the tiny percentage of people who do have the game and want to be sufficiently challenged.

Frankly, what tees someone plays matters little if the pace of play keeps up. That's the real issue that gets little attention.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Matt,

To be honest, I have started to see more and more men shelve the egos and want to play shorter courses.  Maybe its just my age group......but for many 60 plus men, if they don't see a scorecard yardage UNDER 6000, they know the course is too long for them and many 50 plus men are glad to play 6300. 

I always liked playing about the same clubs in as pros. Maybe their increased distance and resulting nine irons to all greens has convinced other golfers to play shorter because they deserve short irons into the greens?

[Jim_Kennedy]

On a course where there are huge differences, 400 + yds or so between boxes, an operator could charge more to play as one moves back. An $80.00 round from the tips might be a $65.00 round from the middle and $50.00 from the front, or some such arrangement of fees that suits the market in the area. A color coded bag tag and a few rangers could maintain the policy on the course, and there isn't any big loss if they miss the occasional player who 'cheats' the system.  

I don't believe many people woild be upset and there is a valid explanation for those that choose to play from the longer, higher priced tee boxes, i.e. you're using more real estate and resources than the person who plays from the front. Everyone who plays the course from less than the back tee is going to feel like they are getting a deal and that the management has their interests at heart.
Even the guys who play the tips will be happy, they'll feel 'special'. Worse case is they feel put upon and go play somewhere else, but a course would not lose any business because the notoriety of having a sliding fee will bring more new players and offset any potential loss.  

I mentioned this a few weeks ago to Pat Mucci, and even he thought it was a good idea.

[Adrian_Stiff]

60 % surchage to play from the back tees... Maybe we should tax the novice for using more width, or a 3 putt cost, we can employ rangers to check as well.

The answer is so much more simple.... educate the membership that they may be off the wrong tees to get the best out of their course, perhaps there might be an interesting fairway bunker at say 200 from the tee somewhere, maybe you could come up with a slogan and posters that say something like "if you cant carry the bunker at the 5th, your probably playing off the wrong tees"

[Matt_Ward]

Jeff:

I don't doubt many 60+ people may opt for the direction you mentioned.

The issue is with those in the 40-60 frame -- they still think they have the game to handle the longer courses.

Like I said the tees played is only as important as the overall pace of play. When I see people play tees too far -- and then they insist on holing out when they have already zipped by double bogey that really sets me off.

Jim:

Help me out here -- what does tee box location have to do with overall pace of play ? If I can play from the tips and keep to the mandatory pace of play what's the big deal ? It's not where one plays -- it's the overall time that counts.

I can tell you this I sure as hell would not feel "special" -- great spin on your part -- how bout my pocket being picked for some additional $$.

[Ken Moum]

Short version is that I believe most courses ougth to have tees at 4000-5600-6300-6800 and whatever the back tees come out to, no longer than 7250, and really, those may not have to be bigger than 15 x 15 feet and maybe not even mowed every day.

Just think about the typical 140 yard hitting female or 190 hitting senior.  To get them around the course in regulation strokes, similar to stronger men would require 14 tee shots at that length, and 22 shots of something other than that length, maybe averaging 2/3 that distance.  Thus:

14 x 140 = 1960
22 x   95 = 2090
Total      = 4050

For seniors

14 x 190 = 2660
22 x 125 = 2750
Total      = 5410

For the 225 Hitter

14 x 225 = 3150
22 x 145 = 3190
Total      = 6340

So you're the culprit, eh Brauer?

I'm just about the average male golfer as far as distance goes.  My tee shots rarely go more than 210--and I play a lot of golf withguys just like me.

But I am not a fan of courses with tees 5600 and 6300.  It is almost impossible to get even the 70+ year olds to play 5600, and none of us have any fun at 6300, unless the course is really, really firm. 

We have a couple of courses here in Topeka that have the whites just barely under 6,000 yards, and every time I play them I am amazed at how many manageable approach shots I and my friends have.  Of course, neither of them are par 72, so that helps as well.

I find it interesting that the guys who play these courses all the time aren't bothered at all by the fact that their 81 is 11 over par.

K

[Jim_Kennedy]

Adrian,
I would think you'd have understood that the numbers were hypothetical, hence the word "might".    

.....and this isn't about getting members at private clubs to play the proper tees. At the ones I frequent the members are smart enough to know which tee suits them best and affords them the most enjoyment, and if they make the wrong choice, causing the course to slow down, they'll soon be apprised of their mistake by another member, the golf committee, or through the club's professional.

It's impossible to tell an American visiting a public course that he can't play from whatever tee he chooses, but offering a cash incentive might help him make the proper choice.    



  

[Jim_Kennedy]

Matt,
You can keep pace from the tips, guys who shouldn't be there cannot. Offer up a little ching and you might get a good chunk of them to check their testosterone at the counter instead of on the course.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Jim and Matt,

Surveys also put camraderie and fun well above golf challenge as reasons to play.  Only a small percentage of golfers plays further back than they are capable just for a "better test" although I agree with Matt that too many play further back out of some kind of social pressure.  Ask any course superintendent which tees get used most, and he will tell you its the ones about 6300 yards 9 times out of 10.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Jeff,
You won't get any disagreement from me about what you just said, and I think cash incentives will aid in removing the social pressure and the misguided limitations while assessing those for whom the added real estate was designed to attract.

[Matt_Ward]

Jeff:

The 40-60 group is where the most issues will happen.

The geezers with the popgun drives already know where to play.

The issue is not the tees but the pace of play -- I have no issue with Walter Brennan playing the tips -- just be sure to stay at the pace of play and when you reach a certain stroke level for the hole it's simple -- PUT BALL IN POCKET AND HEAD TO NEXT TEE.

Jim:

The cash incentive element is just a sideshow -- how bout mgmt just enforce slow play and make sure groups keep moving. Speaking of incentives it doesn't hurt if the food cart remains at the clubhouse instead of providing snacks and goodies for the fat cattle players to munch on so the overall time frame for the round only grows more and more.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Matt,
It's only a 'sideshow' to you because you'd be one of the players that will have to pay your fair share of the millions spent purchasing the extra real estate and the associated costs of constructing and maintaining the 'tips'.

[Matt_Ward]

Jim:

I want to play REAL golf -- not some sporty exec layout.

The issue, which you have failed to grasp, is getting the pace of play moving. The tee box element you and others mention is a sideshow to that overriding concern. If someone wishes to play a certain tee box forward or most rear -- so be it. Just be sure they play to a certain pace.

Let me also mention this -- I didn't force the developers to put in the extra yards -- they wanted to do it to showcase their properties.

Frankly, most people do realize their limitations and play the right boxes. The issue for the small minority that does otherwise is to monitor their pace of play.

Mgmt adds to the situation with all the sideshow elements -- the food cart being one of them -- forcing players to stay on cart paths is another.

[Sean_A]

To me its quite simple.  That added length of courses isn't necessary.  A well designed 6-6500 yarder can challenge damn near everybody.  So why should the average Joe pay for the guy who wants to stand on the back blocks and 7 times out of 10 slow the game down for everybody.  Not only this, but 10 times out of 10 it costs average Joe more in green fees for the priveledge of watching idiots who think they are sticks,  but can't shoot par but once a year.  I don't see anything wrong with added charges, restricted times of the day for the back tees, for instance after 11:00am etc.  Guys go on about educating these idiots, but the thing is, they are idiots and it gets awfully old waiting for an idiot to reach an age of maturity before he figures out he is wasting everybody's time and money for vanity attempt at acting like a pro.  At some point we all have to realize that the vast majority of these supposed big sticks are just not that good, certainly not good enough to be building special tees for.

Ciao   

[Jim_Kennedy]

Matt,
Sorry, but 'you' did force the developer to spend the extra money because writers like yourself have long equated length with a quality experience, and those players who don't play from the tips have to pay for it.  It's about time that you pay your share fair for misleading the golfing public for so many years.

You can 'keep up' when playing the tips, but even you would get around the course faster if you moved up 500 yards, even if that 500 yards only meant 10 minutes less time on the course.

[JR Potts]

I don't mean to be the fly in the ointment here but self-regulating the length of golf courses on the high-end is quite one-sided  and short-sighted.  If that's the case, I proposed having every course be a minimum length?  If I'm a long hitter, why should I pay for you dinkers to play....and visa versa.

The reality is, the courses will be built as the market dictates.  I'll be candid, I hit the ball a long way....I love playing shortish courses (6500-6800 yards) but I also love playing 7500 yard golf courses.  For where I am in my life, that's what suits my game and my tastes the best.  While I understand that the majority of players may not like that length, there are other tees that can suit their fancy...just as there are back tees to suit mine.  

The discussion that one should be paying for the other is just lunacy.  Build the courses as the market suits.....and if people show, great...if they don't, make alterations.  But having some limit is just crazy in my opinion.

And what, since putting is my weakness, should I expect good putters to pay more for the added expense of mowing severely undulated greens instead of flat greens?  This is crazy.

[Alex Miller]

I don't mean to be the fly in the ointment here but self-regulating the length of golf courses on the high-end is quite one-sided  and short-sighted.  If that's the case, I proposed having every course be a minimum length?  If I'm a long hitter, why should I pay for you dinkers to play....and visa versa.

The reality is, the courses will be built as the market dictates.  I'll be candid, I hit the ball a long way....I love playing shortish courses (6500-6800 yards) but I also love playing 7500 yard golf courses.  For where I am in my life, that's what suits my game and my tastes the best.  While I understand that the majority of players may not like that length, there are other tees that can suit their fancy...just as there are back tees to suit mine.  

The discussion that one should be paying for the other is just lunacy.  Build the courses as the market suits.....and if people show, great...if they don't, make alterations.  But having some limit is just crazy in my opinion.

And what, since putting is my weakness, should I expect good putters to pay more for the added expense of mowing severely undulated greens instead of flat greens?  This is crazy.

Couldn't agree more Ryan.

A good rule of thumb at the very least, would be if you can't reach the longest par 4 on the course in two shots at least 60% of the time, you're playing too far back. If a player is capable of playing from the back tees they shouldn't have to pay more for that right.

Give the control to someone other than the player because those same guys who don't realize that they don't have the game to play from back there won't realize they shouldn't spend more to play back there anyways.

[Mike Sweeney]

The reality is, the courses will be built as the market dictates.  I'll be candid, I hit the ball a long way....I love playing shortish courses (6500-6800 yards) but I also love playing 7500 yard golf courses.  For where I am in my life, that's what suits my game and my tastes the best.  While I understand that the majority of players may not like that length, there are other tees that can suit their fancy...just as there are back tees to suit mine.  

Ryan,

Just trying to understand, other than Medinah #3, what courses do you play that are 7500 yards? I honestly can't think of one course within 2 hours of NYC that is 7500 yards. The first one is The Monster going north that I can think of.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Ryan,
Millions extra are spent on courses to make them 7,500 yards long. It's not lunacy to suggest that playing the back tee should have a small premium attached to it. You just don't like the idea for the same reason as Matt, you'd have to cough up a few more dollars, and rightly so.

Alex,
Giving control to someone other than the player has been the status quo for a long time, no one as yet has tried giving more control to the player. There hasn't been anything yet that convinces the 6,500 player that he shouldn't be 7,500, maybe a little cash incentive might do the trick.

Realistically, I don't know for sure if it would, but there is no one that can say it would not.

[JR Potts]

The reality is, the courses will be built as the market dictates.  I'll be candid, I hit the ball a long way....I love playing shortish courses (6500-6800 yards) but I also love playing 7500 yard golf courses.  For where I am in my life, that's what suits my game and my tastes the best.  While I understand that the majority of players may not like that length, there are other tees that can suit their fancy...just as there are back tees to suit mine.  

Ryan,

Just trying to understand, other than Medinah #3, what courses do you play that are 7500 yards? I honestly can't think of one course within 2 hours of NYC that is 7500 yards. The first one is The Monster going north that I can think of.

Mike, I play Butler National (7500+ yard par 71) several times a year.  I play Whistling Straits (7500 yards par 72) a few times a year.  I play Olympia Fields North (7200 yard par 70) a few times a year.  Need more examples?

That said, play a lot of 6700 yard courses and 6500 yard courses and whatnot but I do so when playing for friends - and quite candidly, it's a steady diet of 9 irons and wedges for me.  Granted, my game is nowhere near as good as it used to be so I end up shooting 78 everywhere I play but every once in a while, I like having to hit a 4 iron and a 5 iron into a par 4 during the same round.  And unfortunately, that doesn't happen on your mandated 6700 yard courses.

If you are going to tax the player playing from 7000+ due to the added cost, just please tax the player playing from 6100 as I don't and probably never will feel those tees are necessary.

Yep, my proposal is crazy as well - I guess socialism doesn't work in golf either.

[JR Potts]

Jim - to answer your question, the 6500 yard player's companions should be the incentive.

I can assure you, as a longer hitter, I can't tolerate standing around waiting on every hole for the player in my group who should be playing from 1000 yards up to hit first and second on every hole.  In fact, I refuse to play with those type of guys. 

I play a lot of golf with my law partner and Terry Lavin and God as my witness, I play the back and they play from where ever they want.  It doesn't ruin the game, the round or the enjoyment of it for anyone.  If, on a certain hole I don't feel like walking all the way to the backs or if the hole doesn't provide a greater challenge from the backs, I'll just play from their tees. 

The golfer needs to regulate their own ability.  No amount of incentives will do the trick.  The fact of the matter is golf is supposed to be played in 4ish hours.  If you can't keep up, you should be thrown off the golf course....and that will be and should be in effect regardless of tee selection.

[Tom ORourke]

I have had pros and rangers ask my handicap and recommend tees, which is a great idea. But sometimes you want to go back a set of tees from the whites. So, go down to the Pinehurst area you can play a bunch of courses from the tips. Southern Pines at 6,268. Mid Pines at 6,528. Pinehurst #1 at 6,095. You can then do a few Stranz courses from the tips. Tobacco Road at 6,554. Tot Hill Farm at 6,543. If you are passing through S.C. you can play Caledonia at 6,526. I think those courses would be fun for non-professionals. I don't think you would come off the courses complaining that they were too short. You would be talking about the good holes, the green contours, the fun shots. And the group in front of you should not be out there for 6 hours slogging through 7,000 yards of forced carries that they can't carry. And, if they go to the white tees, they are looking at 6,000 yard courses. There is not much need to build a long course unless you want a tour event. Pacific Dunes is 6,633. Do you think it would be a better course at 7,633? I played my home course last week with 15 guys at 6,300 yards with 2 more sets behind us at 6,800 and 7,100. All handicaps were between 5 and 13. There is no need to go to the back for 98% of the members. Check your ego at the door, and just because you paid full price does not mean you need to play every inch of the course. Most courses do not need Non-Appropriate tees, so why are developers demanding them?  

[JR Potts]

Tom:

Developers are demanding them because some players want them.  And quite candidly, they've erroneously tried to placate this minority of players (which I'm included in)....but that's not my fault.

I've expressed numerous times on here my love of Merion.  But, I would not want to play it every day as it significantly limits my ability to hit driver on most holes - and call me barbaric, but I like hitting driver just as the guy driving it 250 yards does and is able to do.

Should my segment of players be ignored on most designs - maybe and probably.  But should I have to pay more if there are tees there at 7200 yards, no?

The better question is, should designs be better as a la Pine Valley (6900 yards from the back), driver is an option for the longest hitters on almost every hole - but it takes the bravest to pull it out on a lot of those holes.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()