How many sets of tees are really needed?

[Jeb Bearer]

As long as new courses insist on building a set of tees that only the top 1% will play (and as long as the gap in distance continues to expand) then courses today need more than 2 sets of tees, because 1 set will not handle the range of 99% of all golfers.

[Paul Gray]

In the UK, at most places I've played the men's summer daily tee's (normally yellow) are usually significantly ahead of the summer competition tee's (normally white).

This distance is often very considerable and is a total pain when clubs won't let more accomplished members/visitors play off the whites.

Sometimes, usually at the more premium level courses, there is also an extra far back competition tee (normally blue), which seems to be the preserve of infrequent elite competitions.

My preference is for those of a low enough hcp to be able to play off the whites all the time if they wish. If not possible for some justifiable reason, then for the yellows-whites to be placed much closer together, tee wear and space permitting.

All the best.

Much the same drum as I like to bang.

I'd personally stick with white tees being preserved for comps but only where, as you went on to suggest, the yellows are kept as near as practical to the back markers. I've long argued that the medal tees (white) and daily tees (yellow) need only be an average of about eight yards or so apart. If you then want to stick some green markers out, measure them and call them the forward tees, so be it.

Of course, even if a club follows that policy, as some do, the tendency, particularly at some modern more consumerist venues, is to nurse the golfers' ego and 'dumb down' the markers i.e. the suggested green markers become yellow, the yellows become white and the whites become blue. That way 'Hacker A' can tell his friends he played from the medal tees, when in fact he was simply playing from standard tees. Furthermore, the older golfer doesn't have to suffer the dent in pride attached to moving forward beyond the yellows since they are, despite being the furthest forward pegs, still classed as the daily tees. Finally, we then have the added bonus of everyone continuing to kid themselves that they are better than reality would suggest, taking themselves far too seriously, approaching ever putt as if the Ryder Cup depended on it and generally spending four and a half hours holding the rest of us up.

My general belief is that, whilst I'll accept some concessions for the older golfer or the beginner, people need to get back to playing the course as it was designed to be played and stop thinking they've been hard done by if no tees exist for them to shoot 72 from. A lot is said about the values of Golden Age design around here but all too often said values are misinterpreted (I seem to recall an interesting thread on this matter a short while ago). No one ever designed a course back then with the deliberate intent that you and your grandmother should be able to tee it up together.

[John Kavanaugh]

I see little value in golfers being selfish. It is selfish to care who plays any tee that you don't.

[archie_struthers]

 

Real simple ,     Forward ...daily....and competition.......with the daily tees set on the easier side most days.  If it gets too hard to maintain three effectively,just daily and forward,  the real good players can just walk to the back of the bus. .

[John Kavanaugh]

At a private course far more than 1% of its members enjoy the use of the back tees.  Remember that is only 10 golfers per 1000 members.

[Jeb Bearer]

Fair enough. My main point was that it becomes far less feasible to have only, say, two sets of tees as the gap between short and long hitters grows. If you want tees to accommodate all, or most golfers, and the back tees are at 7200 plus, that kind of limits your options. That being said, most of the golfers who play from back there would probably be fine playing from 6900 or so.

[Mike Nuzzo]

Paul
How many sets of tees were at Wolf Point?

Chicago Golf has 2 1/2 sets

cheers

[Garland Bayley]

On another thread, Tom Doak proposed a suggest set of hole lengths for an average length course that could be played by all.

Here's the scorecard that works.  Will see if I have time to make up a course for it:

Par 3 holes:  125 - 160 - 180 - 205 - 230 yards

Short 4's:  300 - 320 - 340 - 360 - 380 yards

Long 4"s:  400 - 420 - 440 - 460 - 480 yards

Par 5 holes:  500 - 550 - 600 yards

That adds up to 6,450 yards, par 70.

Let's make up the forward tee yardages be.
95, 130, 150, 165, 195, 260, 280, 300, 310, 330, 350, 370, 380, 400, 410, 430, 470, 520 Total 5545

For a scorecard, we rate par based on player handicaps. This should allow anyone to make a birdie or two from time to time. Not that I think this is that important, but it seems all the low handicap players on this site seem to think players have an unalienable right to make birdies. As these low handicappers age, they threaten that they will leave the game if you don't give them forward tees.

The proposed score card is not all that much larger than a standard scorecard you see these days. It matches in size a scorecard for a course with 5 tees.

The pars are based on USGA handicap index. When you see an entry like <15, <2 that means the pars are rated for male players with index less than 15, and female player with index less than 2. Clearly I am not a expert in these things, so it is a starting point suggestion.

Now let's make the scorecard.

Hole Number        1      2      3      4      5      6      7       8      9     10     11     12     13     14     15     16     17     18    Total
Yardage            320  460  180  420   600  125   380   160  400   500   205   360   480    300   550    340   230   440    6450
Par <4                  4      4     3      4       5     3       4       3     4       4       3      4       4        4      5       4       3       4       69
Par <15  <2          4      4     3      4       5     3       4       3     4       5       3      4       5        4      5       4       3       4       71
Par <26, <15        4      5     3      4       6     3       4       3     4       5       3      4       5        4      5       4       4       4       74
Yardage            280   410  150  370   520   95    310   130  350   430   165  300   410    260   470    280   195    400   5545
Par <37, <23        4      4     3      4       5     3       4       3     4       5       3      4       4         4     5        4       3       4      71
Par <41                4       5    3      4       6     3       4       3     4       5       3      4       5         4     5        5       4       4      74

[Garland Bayley]

Garland,

I can assure you that my experience in setting up a golf course to accomodate the broad spectrum of golfers is exponentially greater than yours.

You sit in an ivory tower, insulated and isolated from the real world.

Two (2) sets of tees at a local golf club would incite a riot.

Yes, I am sure Pat Mucci and his band of three close minded musketeers would attempt to riot.


You'd have the women golfers, the good, mediocre and poor women golfers, the Seniors, the Parents of the Juniors, along with the worst, mediocre and best golfers calling for your head, irrespective of how tiny it is.

I have lived among the worst golfers for several years now. The problem with you good golfers is that you don't understand we know we are the worst golfers, and you apply your standards to us. We are not going to riot if we don't have worst golfer tees, because we know we stink and we are comfortable with that.

Even Garden City Golf Club, which has just two (2) sets of tees for decades upon decades, established a third set for Seniors and Juniors.

So please tell me about the riot at GCGC. Obviously there was one, as they had the temerity to have only two sets of tees, which you claim is riot inducing.

You need to come down from that academic ivory tower into the real world in order to see what happens where the rubber meets the road, at an annual or semi-annual membership meeting.

You need to learn to discuss golf course architecture. You bore me to tears with your threads, "What courses have bunkers .....
with face height more than 6' high.?" This is not golf course architecture discussion. It is golf course facts recollection.

[Patrick_Mucci]

As long as new courses insist on building a set of tees that only the top 1% will play (and as long as the gap in distance continues to expand) then courses today need more than 2 sets of tees, because 1 set will not handle the range of 99% of all golfers.

Jeb,

Why did you predispose your position by erroneously stating that only the top 1 % play the back tees ?

I know of a course where for decades upon decades 50 % of the membership played the back tees.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Garland,

I can assure you that my experience in setting up a golf course to accomodate the broad spectrum of golfers is exponentially greater than yours.

You sit in an ivory tower, insulated and isolated from the real world.

Two (2) sets of tees at a local golf club would incite a riot.

Yes, I am sure Pat Mucci and his band of three close minded musketeers would attempt to riot.

That just shows how little you know, which doesn't surprise anyone.
When you live in an ivory tower I wouldn't expect you to know how the real world operates.
JME stated that confining play to just two sets of tees would result in a mass exodus.
Why do you think that is ?


You'd have the women golfers, the good, mediocre and poor women golfers, the Seniors, the Parents of the Juniors, along with the worst, mediocre and best golfers calling for your head, irrespective of how tiny it is.

I have lived among the worst golfers for several years now.
The problem with you good golfers is that you don't understand we know we are the worst golfers, and you apply your standards to us.
We are not going to riot if we don't have worst golfer tees, because we know we stink and we are comfortable with that.

You're so ignorant on this subject that it's hard to decide where to start.
You may stink and you may be willing to pay the same as every other member while accepting an inferior product.
But, various factions within a club, pay their dues and expect equal treatment.
They don't want to be told that play is confined to two tees.

Seniors will riot, Juniors, not so much, but, the women, you have no idea.
Again, living in that ivory tower insulates and isolates you from the real world.
And, in the real world, members want choices and two tees for the broad spectrum of members isn't sufficient choice.


Even Garden City Golf Club, which has just two (2) sets of tees for decades upon decades, established a third set for Seniors and Juniors.

So please tell me about the riot at GCGC. Obviously there was one, as they had the temerity to have only two sets of tees, which you claim is riot inducing.

You're so out of touch that it's quite remarkable.
Do you think that one day, a Senior member requested another set of tees, and the next day they were built ?
Are you that obtuse, that isolated and insulated ?
Or, do you think the Senior tees evolved over a much longer period of time, with lobbying and an aging membership influencing the decision.

You need to come down from that academic ivory tower into the real world in order to see what happens where the rubber meets the road, at an annual or semi-annual membership meeting.

You need to learn to discuss golf course architecture. You bore me to tears with your threads, "What courses have bunkers .....
with face height more than 6' high.?" This is not golf course architecture discussion. It is golf course facts recollection.

For someone who rarely contributes to this site by initiating threads you sure have a big mouth.
Try creating a few interesting threads, try fostering discussion and debate regarding architecture and architectural features, first.
Then, after you've created about 50 or so, get back to me and let me know what the average number of hits and replies were.
Then, you might have something interesting to say.

[Garland Bayley]

...
For someone who rarely contributes to this site by initiating threads you sure have a big mouth.
Try creating a few interesting threads, try fostering discussion and debate regarding architecture and architectural features, first.
Then, after you've created about 50 or so, get back to me and let me know what the average number of hits and replies were.
Then, you might have something interesting to say.
...

Try this one on for size

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,54567.0.html

Why don't you let me know what you think of sea rushes as hazards?

It's easy to list facts. Therefore, it's easy to respond to what courses have bunker with faces greater than 6' high. But, no one learned anything meaningful.

[V. Kmetz]

So many of the recent threads regarding yardage make sound points regarding "How the yardage is distributed" and resist some generality:

but at that risk, my ideal is for four sets:

Forward   5400

White      6100

Blue         6600

Black        7001 (my druthers? These tees are almost hidden from natural view.  I don't want blue players finding them at a glance)

My hope is that I could have two one-shot holes and two par 4s where all tees play within 40 yards of each other, but the property would have to have the final say.

cheers

vk

[Garland Bayley]

V.

Why should a course maintain four sets of tees? It has been agreed on this website many times that you cannot equalize a course by changing hole length. At least, not until we can get dynamically moving hole features. Just step up to the tees of your choice, punch in the desired configuration, and let the hole reconfigure itself before you play it.

[Mike Nuzzo]

Women's tees should be less than 5,000 - I like something closer to 4,500
Check out the yardages at some of Pete Dye's courses - with obvious input from Alice
I wouldn't build them up and have them look silly - no one else would notice

Ask Arthur Little - he lives and breathes the forward tees

[John Kavanaugh]

Garland,

What percentage of your golfing dollar are you willing to sacrifice so other people can enjoy the game in a manner that you do not?  It is not possible to play golf without also paying for others enjoyment  The field is to large and our individual skills to varied. Honestly, are you an only child?

[V. Kmetz]

GB,

It may have been "agreed" by the site at large(?) and even by people smarter than myself, but I do not agree. I think (while perfect equality is unattainable) a "near-equivalent" translation of challenge can be accorded by judicious and smart deployment of more than two tee boxes.

I actually think that's one of the foremost aspects of great architecture... to reign in the disparities of all who might play the course.  Obviously if few women and few seniors prospect to play it, maybe the forward markers I propose are unneccessary, but my goal on two and three shots holes would be to get the drives (by distinct tee boxes) into the same 30x30 zone from each, and where impossible to see what can be done about translating the approach.  

As to pure maintenance of four teeing grounds, they obviously don't have to be four separate plazas on every hole...some long thin tee boxes here, some wide ones there, and occasionally yes, four smaller ones on some of them.

Lastly, there are angles to consider, angles of tee play and what angles, lies and carries this leaves going in. A well-designed course can embrace these notions, imo.

cheers

vk

[V. Kmetz]

On consideration of Mike N's post, I would bring down my forward distance closer to 4800...yes, that's right, I've forgotten about m y experience of watching women using their driver on a 130 yard par 3 and not hitting it...not coming close

5400 is too much...I stand corrected.

cheers

vk

[Patrick_Mucci]

...
For someone who rarely contributes to this site by initiating threads you sure have a big mouth.
Try creating a few interesting threads, try fostering discussion and debate regarding architecture and architectural features, first.
Then, after you've created about 50 or so, get back to me and let me know what the average number of hits and replies were.
Then, you might have something interesting to say.
...

Try this one on for size

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,54567.0.html

Heck of a thread, it got 18 replies

What's that, one thread in five years ?

Why don't you let me know what you think of sea rushes as hazards?

Depends where they're located

It's easy to list facts.

If it's so easy why haven't you been able to do it ?

Therefore, it's easy to respond to what courses have bunker with faces greater than 6' high. But, no one learned anything meaningful.
You mean that YOU didn't learn anything.
You certainly don't speak for every one on this site

[Garland Bayley]

Why don't you let me know what you think of sea rushes as hazards?

Depends where they're located

OK, since you seem to have trouble discussing a concept, what courses do you find sea rushes on as hazards?

[Garland Bayley]

Garland,

What percentage of your golfing dollar are you willing to sacrifice so other people can enjoy the game in a manner that you do not?  It is not possible to play golf without also paying for others enjoyment  The field is to large and our individual skills to varied. Honestly, are you an only child?

 

[Garland Bayley]

V.

Pacific Dunes #4: Par 4, 463 yards, how do you make it "near equivalent" for all players? The fairway bunkers present the same questions? The green side bunkers present the same questions? The landing zone is 30 by 30 for all? The approach shot presents the same questions?

How is this puzzle near equivalent for all?

[Sean_A]

It depends on what the club/course hosts.  If it hosts top am or pro stuff on a regular basis than than obviously an extra set of lengthy tees needs to be built.  I spose the length depends on the course, climate and weather.  

For courses that are just long because they think its a great marketing gimmick as a "championship" course, I don't care.  They can do as they will because I rarely play those sorts of joints.  Its almost as if 7000 yards is a turn off for me unless I know the length is warranted by special play.  That focus on length creates doubt in mind about the quality of the design.

For most courses:

A set around 4500-5000ish

A set around 5500-6200ish

A set around 6500ish

Ciao

[Jeb Bearer]

As long as new courses insist on building a set of tees that only the top 1% will play (and as long as the gap in distance continues to expand) then courses today need more than 2 sets of tees, because 1 set will not handle the range of 99% of all golfers.

Jeb,

Why did you predispose your position by erroneously stating that only the top 1 % play the back tees ?

I know of a course where for decades upon decades 50 % of the membership played the back tees.

My point was, "If you are going to have a set at 7000 plus, then..." I may have exaggerated with 1%, but I don't think half the golfers play from that long.

[Jason Thurman]

Garland,

What percentage of your golfing dollar are you willing to sacrifice so other people can enjoy the game in a manner that you do not?  It is not possible to play golf without also paying for others enjoyment  The field is to large and our individual skills to varied. Honestly, are you an only child?

 

Is that a yes?