Life is too short to play bad courses

[Alex Miller]

The thing is


people on here don't really play bad courses. A bad course on the Doak scale is a 1 or a 2. Not including myself I only saw a couple of those courses listed. So people on here really don't play bad courses after all!

[Emile Bonfiglio]

1) Do you subscribe to the life is too short to play bad courses?
No, but sometimes the day is not long enough to get to the great courses

2) did it take you more than four months to play your last ten courses?
It did, but I have played many of them multiple times

3) why don’t you play more courses and/or more golf?
There are just some courses that I've never gotten around to. I like to play at first light so I try and keep it within a reasonable distance from home.

4) which would you choose and why
     a. Playing a Doak 3 as often as you wanted and any other course once per year
     b. Playing whatever course you wanted one time per month (can be a different course each month if desired)
I would go for option B, I need to play more than once a month.

[J Sadowsky]

In the recent “last 10 played” thread it was said “life is too short to play bad courses.”

As it turns out, it appears the “life is too short” sentiment is one many subscribe to on this site and most golf is not played on average courses, based on those who posted on the “last 10 played” thread.  Of the 18 individuals who listed their last 10 with a Doak score, the average course score is 6.0 (I excluded myself – the score would have dropped .1 if I was included).  If everyone had listed their Doak score for the courses they played, I feel confident the avg score would have been higher.  To my surprise a few people played great courses but over a lengthy period of time.

So now comes the questions:
1) Do you subscribe to the life is too short to play bad courses?

No.  Golf, particularly in the United States, is a sport with inequality of access (public and private).  I've gotten to the point where I personally can afford to play at least higher end daily fee courses, but I sometimes play with people who don't feel comfortable paying that much for golf. Architecture is one reason to play golf, but it is not the only one.

2) If you subscribe to the life is too short to play bad courses did it take you more than four months to play your last ten courses?

I don't, but yes, it did.

3) If yes to 1 and 2 why don’t you play more courses and/or more golf?

N/A, but time.

4) For everyone if given the following two options which would you choose and why
     a. Playing a Doak 3 as often as you wanted and any other course once per year
     b. Playing whatever course you wanted one time per month (can be a different course each month if desired)

It'd be a tough call now, since I probably only get out 15-20 a year anyway right now, but in 5-10 years when I can play more this will be a no brainer.  B right now, moving to A in several years.

[J Sadowsky]

Life is too short to play golf alone.  If this is something you enjoy doing it is time to evaluate your relationships.

I could not disagree more. Being on the golf course by yourself with nobody around is one of the best experiences in the world!

Agree with this statement.

[Jim_Coleman]

Here's a question:  Assume you're lucky enough to get an annual invite to play Baltusrol or Winged Foot.  Do you play the Open course each year, or do you alternate?  What if it's Teeth of the Dog vs. Dye Fore?   If you got to play more than one round on a visit, surely you would play both courses.  But what if it's one round per year?  Clearly if it's Pine Valley and Merion, you'd alternate.  But what if one course is truly great and the other is only very good?

[Jud_T]

Life is too short to play bad courses.  I don't buy the "I'd rather be with my buddies on a dogtrack than not" scenario.  I'd rather go out for drinks with my buddies and play a Doak 5 by myself if I can't convince them to play at least a half-way decent track.  If you don't call Alaska home there's no reason for not playing the best available track that's within your area and price point IMO.  Otherwise what the hell are you doing slumming on this site?

[George Pazin]

Life is too short to play bad courses.  I don't buy the "I'd rather be with my buddies on a dogtrack than not" scenario.  I'd rather go out for drinks with my buddies and play a Doak 5 by myself if I can't convince them to play at least a half-way decent track.  If you don't call Alaska home there's no reason for not playing the best available track that's within your area and price point IMO.  Otherwise what the hell are you doing slumming on this site?

Jud, most people on here think a Doak 5 is awful, a real chore to play...

[John Kavanaugh]

Life is too short to play bad courses.  I don't buy the "I'd rather be with my buddies on a dogtrack than not" scenario.  I'd rather go out for drinks with my buddies and play a Doak 5 by myself if I can't convince them to play at least a half-way decent track.  If you don't call Alaska home there's no reason for not playing the best available track that's within your area and price point IMO.  Otherwise what the hell are you doing slumming on this site?

I'm on this site trying to make golf better by enlightening you people.  I don't believe it is possible for a married employed father to play around of golf without expensing something else you could be doing.  He who has me time will eventually find himself alone.  Why not just spend an hour on the range and take your wife or child for a walk instead of just thinking about yourself.  At least when you play with friends there is a chance you might make his life more pleasant.  Playing alone, I don't get it if you indeed believe life is too short.

Truth be known, for about half you guys life can't get over quickly enough.

[Jud_T]

John,

I meant to add playing with my wife and/or son on a decent track rather than with friends on a dogtrack.  And it's obvious who wears the pants in your family...

[Matthew Petersen]

Seems like there's a bit of dissonance in responses about what constitutes a bad course. So many of the responses in the other thread were full of Doak 8-10s ... a 5 starts to look kind of shady in such circumstances. But 5s are by no realistic measure bad courses.

That doesn't mean people would travel to see them. I don't think anyone would suggest you should plan a cross country trip to see a Doak 5 or 6.

The question really comes down more to what Jud said. On a Saturday afternoon would you rather play a crowded muni with no GCA merit at all with your buds ... or just sit with them in a bar? Or what if you're playing alone? Is just playing golf important enough for you that you're happy to play anything anywhere? Ian Andrew's answer gave a good response to that.

For me, I love golf more than I love GCA. I sneak out after work sometimes and play wherever I can.

[John Kavanaugh]

John,

I meant to add playing with my wife and/or son on a decent track rather than with friends on a dogtrack.  And it's obvious who wears the pants in your family...

I would think it is obvious by now that any woman who has stayed married to me for 30 years does not fit traditional mores.

[George Pazin]

On a Saturday afternoon would you rather play a crowded muni with no GCA merit at all with your buds ... or just sit with them in a bar?

I'm assuming you're young, single with no kids, because that's not even remotely the question for many of us.

[Matthew Petersen]

On a Saturday afternoon would you rather play a crowded muni with no GCA merit at all with your buds ... or just sit with them in a bar?

I'm assuming you're young, single with no kids, because that's not even remotely the question for many of us.

I am married and have a child, but was referencing Jud's post. he wrote: "I'd rather go out for drinks with my buddies and play a Doak 5 by myself if I can't convince them to play at least a half-way decent track."

[Tim Martin]

What kind of elitist really believes that "Life is too short to play bad couses."  I get when one uses the comment in jest - but to really stand by it.....that's crazy.

If the course is the predominant dictator of your enjoyment of a round of golf, I think a new motto is necessary:  "Life is too short to have shitty friends."

I'll play anywhere - and I mean anywhere - given the right mix of playing companions.

I`m with Ryan on this all the way. The guys you are with mean as much as the architecture.

[Joe_Tucholski]

Life is too short to play golf alone.  If this is something you enjoy doing it is time to evaluate your relationships.

John not sure if this was just a thought that popped into your head or if you implied I indicated one needed to play alone or that I preferred it.  I do enjoy playing alone in the afternoon at twilight.  I don't enjoy going to the range and much prefer going off to play a few holes on my own and I do enjoy it as a way to recharge and unwind a little.  Would I want to play every round for the rest of my life alone...certainly not.

1) Do you subscribe to the life is too short to play bad courses?
Doesn't have anything to do with life being short as much as it does not having enough time, which may sound similar but the former is a broader life philosophy  while the latter is a point in time assessment that may change over time. Anyway, for me every round needs to be about who I am playing with (good friends, kids) in which case it doesn't matter where I am playing or where I'm playing (not necessarily highly ranked but somewhere I love to play).  When I get both good people and a good course, that puts it off the charts, which is why I have invested so much time at Kingsley Club this year.

I figured time constraints due to family life would be a popular reason for decreased time on the course, but also think golf is a great family activity (also understand not everyone enjoys golf).

Joe,

In my house, we have it both ways.

My 24 year old son prefers to play the home club over and over, just play.

I prefer playing something new (to me) and good far less often.

He has turned me down for trips to TOC, Pebble, Bandon, and others saying "why go so far to play golf?"

I guess polling this bunch about playing preferences might not be representative.  Most of us "architecture snobs" play more for the architecture than to just play.  At least, I do. I don't give a damn what I shoot, I want the "experience" of great architecture.  I think I (we) are in a big minority.

The type of preference you describe is what I wanted to try and understand with the questions.  I understand why individuals with the means would choose to skip out on poor/average courses if they are playing lots of golf on good/great courses.  But Don't really get the mind set to play a few great courses (unless one is your home course and you play it frequently).  Would I be off in saying you don't really play golf for the sporting aspect but instead to enjoy the art.  My wife dislikes playing golf but really enjoys walking great courses with me (she loathes walking the poor courses).  If that is the case what is the value added to playing as opposed to walking, which I assume you do quite frequently.  I could see an advantage to putting on the greens but you would have to putt from multiple different positions to really understand the subtleties and deceptive nature of the greens.  Also was there a time when you played golf more for the sport than the art (wondering if the profession changed your mentality or your mentality contributed to your profession).

I have to admit it is.  As I posted earlier this week my game has deteriorated to the point that I play golf for the architecture more than the game.  

Bogey it appears my assumptions with Jeff are true for you.  Do you regularly walk courses without playing?

3) why don’t you play more courses and/or more golf?
Time is the single reason (work and family come before playing golf)

4) which would you choose and why
     a. Playing a Doak 3 as often as you wanted and any other course once per year
     b. Playing whatever course you wanted one time per month (can be a different course each month if desired)
Play the course I’d want to see – I would rather learn something new than work on my game. I love the art more than the sport. Even re-discovering my game changed nothing

Work was another reason I assumed people would say they don't play golf.  I've made a bit of a career change partly to allow for more golf.  I didn't much enjoy my previous job and feel that regardless of the job it will turn into a job.  If I golfed for a living I don't think I would enjoy golf all that much.  I'm assuming you enjoy your work and jealous of that.

It has also become clear to me the golf to enjoy art is the mindset of those that choose few high quality courses over the high quantity of avg/poor.

Perhaps the same people who chimed in on the other thread haven't chimed in here yet...

..but there seems to be at least a little bit of contradiction here.  All the responses here are basically, "anytime, anywhere, with anyone"...but I guess these rules are suspended when ones goes on a golf trip and limits the action to just one or two very selective venues.

I think another explanation for the perceived contradiction to this thread and the other is many have the means to play great golf courses as often as they desire but also if pressed would choose anytime, anywhere, with anyone.  Which I believe is logical.  I also agree that on a trip I'm going to be a bit more selective than my average round.

Here's a question:  Assume you're lucky enough to get an annual invite to play Baltusrol or Winged Foot.  Do you play the Open course each year, or do you alternate?  What if it's Teeth of the Dog vs. Dye Fore?   If you got to play more than one round on a visit, surely you would play both courses.  But what if it's one round per year?  Clearly if it's Pine Valley and Merion, you'd alternate.  But what if one course is truly great and the other is only very good?

If the opportunity was certain to present itself every year I would alternate the first two years and then primarily play the preferred course thereafter.

Life is too short to play bad courses.  I don't buy the "I'd rather be with my buddies on a dogtrack than not" scenario.  I'd rather go out for drinks with my buddies and play a Doak 5 by myself if I can't convince them to play at least a half-way decent track.  If you don't call Alaska home there's no reason for not playing the best available track that's within your area and price point IMO.  Otherwise what the hell are you doing slumming on this site?

Jud I know there are situations where I would rather be with my buddies on a dogtrack than not playing.  Probably my favorite round from my last 10 courses was on a course I rated as a 1 but played with two friends I hadn't seen in years.  We didn't play the best available track because honestly I don't enjoy playing with one of the guys on a nice course as much because I would worry about our pace or his frequent yells of "fore."  He's started to play more often and eventually we'll play nicer courses together.  Don't think I understand the last sentence.

[Jud_T]

Joe,

Are there any courses you've ever played that you wouldn't play again under any circumstances?

[John Kavanaugh]

How is life too short for golfers?  What are some examples of things you want to do but can not because of the 80 or so years you may live?

[Jeff Shelman]

I do believe that in almost all cases that life is too short to play bad golf courses. I think that is especially true at point in time, when golf course deals can be readily found. The number of pretty decent courses that can be played for the same price or slightly more than a dog track is pretty large.

Since the beginning of 2002, I have played 185 different, unique golf courses. Some I played once, some I've played many times. The list is here: http://onlygolfmatters.com/unique-courses-played-since-2002/

There are a handful of great golf courses on this list, but the overwhelming number of them range somewhere between decent and pretty darn good.

Of those 185 courses, I would describe five of them as bad: Highland National, Wickenberg CC, Gopher Hills, Sartell Golf Club and Mississippi Dunes. I played two of them as part of an event. I played two of them as my first round of the year in Minnesota (when anything is better than no golf). And one was set up by a friend and I was just along for the ride.

I've played 17 different courses this year and only Highland National is bad.

I play the vast majority of my golf at my home club. It is a classic course that is probably a 4 or a 5 on the Doak scale. I grew up playing a course that is probably a 3 or a 4. To me, those aren't bad courses.

My club hosts a large three day pro-am for local/regional pros. That weekend, we get tee times at other clubs. I played two lower end privates in the Twin Cities. I had a great time. Neither were bad courses and if I had to play all my golf at those two, life would be just fine.

But to play a course that is truly bad? You're going to have to be a heck of a friend, it's going to have to be heck of an outing or the beer is going to have to be really, really cold for me to be there.

And I don't believe that there are very many times when the options are bad golf or no golf. Usually there are better options out there. Part of the beauty of this site is that the better options are easy to find. We have people from all over the world who are very willing to provide advice. I have asked several times (either on the board or in a private message) about where to play in a certain area (without begging for access) and that has helped.

There are plenty of options out there. So I will rarely take a bad option. If that makes me a golf snob, then so be it.

[Joel_Stewart]

Agreed although I had an experience a few weeks ago joining 3 guys who are lifetime freinds at a so-so public course and it turned out to be a hell of a lot of fun.  The social aspect far out weighed the golf course.

[Joe_Tucholski]

Joe,

Are there any courses you've ever played that you wouldn't play again under any circumstances?

No there is not.  Depending on circumstances I would play any course I have played already or that I have yet to play.  That being said there are courses that I would prefer not to play again.

[Mike Benham]

... joining 3 guys who are lifetime freinds at a so-so public course ...

I'll guess Wente Vineyards with Sandy Tatum, RTJ Jr. and Ben Crenshaw ...

[Lynn_Shackelford]

... joining 3 guys who are lifetime freinds at a so-so public course ...

I'll guess Wente Vineyards with Sandy Tatum, RTJ Jr. and Ben Crenshaw ...

No, I think it was Crystal Springs with O.J. Mayo, Pete Carroll and the father of Reggie Bush.

[Mark Bourgeois]

... joining 3 guys who are lifetime freinds at a so-so public course ...

I'll guess Wente Vineyards with Sandy Tatum, RTJ Jr. and Ben Crenshaw ...

No, I think it was Crystal Springs with O.J. Mayo, Pete Carroll and the father of Reggie Bush.

UCLA grad, huh?

[Mac Plumart]

Joe,

Are there any courses you've ever played that you wouldn't play again under any circumstances?

Yes.

[Marty Bonnar]

In the interest of egalitarian aphorism-rebuttal, I'd like to add that sometimes, just sometimes, 'Money is too short to play good courses'.
Ayethenkyoo,
F.