"2-Hour Round" Concept to be tested at Deer Run Golf Club

[John Kavanaugh]

John,

Shame. You were doing so well. 

I know.  I just believe that everyone should and can play exactly as fast or slow as the wish without disturbing other groups on the course.  It only takes communication and a touch of sacrifice.  I do it over 100 times a year.

[BHoover]

Brian,

I can play 18 holes (walking) in 3 to 3 1/2 hours on a course with reasonable tee/green walks with out rushing at all. This is how I would prefer to play every single one of my rounds. I agree that a 2-hour round is less than ideal but I would jump at the chance to add additional 18-hole rounds before/after work because I knew they would only take two hours.

~Evan

If it was reasonable to play an enjoyable round in 2 hours, then I'd be all in favor of it.  But it's simply not reasonable...at least not if you are at all interested in playing and scoring reasonably well.  If you're merely out for a brisk walk, interrupted by the occasional golf shot, then I suppose it's feasible, but I wouldn't count on playing too well.

[Evan Louden]

If it was reasonable to play an enjoyable round in 2 hours, then I'd be all in favor of it.  But it's simply not reasonable...at least not if you are at all interested in playing and scoring reasonably well.  If you're merely out for a brisk walk, interrupted by the occasional golf shot, then I suppose it's feasible, but I wouldn't count on playing too well.

I might debate that. I play with plenty of people who would play much better if they thought less and just hit the ball. It'd be interesting to see how differently people scored playing in 2 hours.

~Evan

[Josh Tarble]

I like to play quick, but I also want to be able to ENJOY a round of golf with my friends without having to watch the clock constantly or worry about inane rules like lonly lining up putts from behind the ball, taking only 1 practice swing or measuring the distance that my cart/bag is between the green and the next tee.

If I play in less than 3 hours, great.  But if we're having a good time and not holding anyone up, who cares that a round takes longer than 4 hours?  Let me play the game without worrying about anything else.   

Brian,
I also don't want to be constantly worry about time or "on the clock" but I think most of those of those suggestions on the sheet are things you or I do on a regular basis.   To some, they probably don't even think about things like parking the cart between the green and tee or even having a ball ready in your cart, but they are easy to do and dramatically speed up play.  The more you can help people with the basics, the more everyone can enjoy the round.

[BHoover]

I like to play quick, but I also want to be able to ENJOY a round of golf with my friends without having to watch the clock constantly or worry about inane rules like lonly lining up putts from behind the ball, taking only 1 practice swing or measuring the distance that my cart/bag is between the green and the next tee.

If I play in less than 3 hours, great.  But if we're having a good time and not holding anyone up, who cares that a round takes longer than 4 hours?  Let me play the game without worrying about anything else.   

Brian,
I also don't want to be constantly worry about time or "on the clock" but I think most of those of those suggestions on the sheet are things you or I do on a regular basis.   To some, they probably don't even think about things like parking the cart between the green and tee or even having a ball ready in your cart, but they are easy to do and dramatically speed up play.  The more you can help people with the basics, the more everyone can enjoy the round.

Good point, Josh.  I think these rules are usually just good etiquette, so that's always a good thing.  But I just don't think it's feasible to do all that and watch the clock and still have an enjoyable round of golf. Moreover, 2 hours isn't enough time to appreciate/study the architecture (which is what this site is all about).

 

[Josh Tarble]

I like to play quick, but I also want to be able to ENJOY a round of golf with my friends without having to watch the clock constantly or worry about inane rules like lonly lining up putts from behind the ball, taking only 1 practice swing or measuring the distance that my cart/bag is between the green and the next tee.

If I play in less than 3 hours, great.  But if we're having a good time and not holding anyone up, who cares that a round takes longer than 4 hours?  Let me play the game without worrying about anything else.   

Brian,
I also don't want to be constantly worry about time or "on the clock" but I think most of those of those suggestions on the sheet are things you or I do on a regular basis.   To some, they probably don't even think about things like parking the cart between the green and tee or even having a ball ready in your cart, but they are easy to do and dramatically speed up play.  The more you can help people with the basics, the more everyone can enjoy the round.

Good point, Josh.  I think these rules are usually just good etiquette, so that's always a good thing.  But I just don't think it's feasible to do all that and watch the clock and still have an enjoyable round of golf. Moreover, 2 hours isn't enough time to appreciate/study the architecture (which is what this site is all about).

 

No, you're exactly right, I don't know if it's feasible either.  But incorporating some of these things into a regular round maybe turns a 4:30 affair into a 4 hour round with not much effort. 

I know for me, it's easy to forget that some people don't purposely try to play slow, they just don't think of the basics and if we can help people learn everyone wins.

[Neil Johnston]

I'm with Josh on this one - I basically abide by the rules of that sheet every time I play, but a staggering number of people do not. Initiatives like this could help rid certain golfers of bad habits. More frustrating than a 4+ hour round in total are specific instances where the guy ahead of you does a ridiculous thing and holds you up for an extended period.

Like Tom, I played 2 hour rounds on foot for the 100 Hole Hike, and it was not a pace I would want to keep all the time. 2.5 - 3 hours seems ideal to me and doable.

[Paul Gray]

John,

I fundamentally agree with you. I just don't understand why you perceive it to be a sacrifice to call quicker players through. I wonder whether perhaps the difference isn't just one of golfing culture, rather than a difference in intent.

Can't help thinking you might view things differently if you played golf at a traditional British course where tee times simply didn't exist and you fancied a few holes by yourself after work on a sunny Summer's evening. I can assure you that you'd be hard pushed to find many on this side of the pond that would regard that as sad.

I was out in a two ball late last Sunday when a lone lady caught us up. Naturally enough, despite having people in front of us, we asked her if she'd like to play through. She declined so we said she would equally be welcome to join us. That she did and the three of us passed an enjoyable evening of golf together. For me, it would be a shame to play at such a place and in such a way that prevented that sort of thing from happening. If I'm right, rather than you approach her, you would have preferred that she wander off looking for space elsewhere on the course. To each their own.

[Dave McCollum]

I like to play quickly, so limit my play to slow days and an open course.  Yesterday our twosome waited on the very slow twosome in front.  The routing loops back to the house after 6 where we saw the head pro practicing his putting.  We asked him to join us for the last three holes on the front.  A single arrived when we were on the tee, so we told him to go through and warned him about the slow guys ahead.  We played three holes on the back and saw three groups on the next tee, a long par 4: a threesome of beginners, the slow twosome, and the single.  The beginners let the slow twosome and the single through and we ended up skipping a hole and a half and finishing our match.  We were done with lunch before the twosome completed their round  about an hour after ours, the poor single still waiting behind them.  It made me wonder what kind of golfer accepts the courtesy of playing through a slow group then does not return the favor to the single behind them? 

It was a weekday and not busy until after we started.  Public course.  The front took 2+ hours and the 7.5 holes on the back about an hour, not that it’s important, because that how we play—skipping holes to open parts of the course and playing match play at a good pace.  Personally, I think the two hour round is ideal golf, but do not think imposing my favored pace on other players is very good manners.  However, the other side of that coin is that slow twosome taking over 4 hours to play an empty course and refusing to let faster players through.  To me, they could use some manners and little courtesy for other golfers.

And, yes, everyone was in carts.  I enjoy walking when the pace is slower.  I also enjoy fast games in a cart, often with folks who can no longer walk the course.  I loved the sign at North Berwick West Links that said “a round of golf should take no more than three hours.”  No carts there.  Unfortunately, we skipped a hole there because of a group of glacial tourists.  Fortunately, on our second round of the day, so no big deal

[Mark Johnson]

A few comments.

First off, I am likely one of the few here who has played this course and this course sets up pretty well for this.   shorter course, wide fairways, not that much distance between tee boxes.    However, there are a fair number of blind tee shots and a couple of drivable par 4s on the back which could slow times down.

My biggest comment, though, is that this isn't about pace of play, this is a marketing concept.   In the ever crowded minneapolis public golf wars, this is a great way to compete for additionall off peak $$, nothing more nothing less.   If you think this is too quick, then don't play.  From what i've heard they cant fill the times fast enough.

[Mike Sweeney]

They posted these follow up comments:

4/26/14 Update: We tested the 2-Hour Round idea for the first time on 4/26/14 at Deer Run GC in Victoria, MN with 12 golfers. Six 2-somes tee’d off using the first 30 minutes of tee times for the day. They were able to tee off every 4 minutes. The first group finished in 2 hours and 4 minutes and the last group finished in 2 hours and 27 minutes. Here’s what we learned:
- Golfers that shot in the 70′s finished right around 2:00.
- Golfers that shoot in the 80′s finished in 2:15-2:20.
- Golfers that shoot in the 90′s finished in 2:20-2:30.
- None of the golfers felt “rushed”.
- 75% of golfers said they would not have been able to play that day if it was a normal 4 hour round because of other commitments that day.
- 100% of golfers said they enjoyed it and would do it again if offered.
- View pics from the day at www.2HourGolf.com
- Times when this would work for courses are either a) the 1st hour of tee times of the day or b) Twilight if the course blocks off the teesheet for 2 hours before the 1st 2-Hour round teetime.
- We’re going to test it again at a different courses to see if the results vary. Our goal is to have 10-15 more MN courses try this locally then expand the concept nationwide in the fall. If other courses are interested in trying this idea, please contact Kevin Unterreiner at info@twincitiesgolf.com.

[John Kavanaugh]

This is a great program if it gets the rake and runners off early and on time.  Gotta love finally having proof that lower scores equals lower times.

[Mike Sweeney]

This is a great program if it gets the rake and runners off early and on time.  Gotta love finally having proof that lower scores equals lower times.

Mountain Lake often sends off twosomes for the first hour on weekends. During the winter when light is shorter in hours, it assures that the hard core golfer can play 36 and enjoy a leisurely (but slightly early) lunch.

In the Mike Young view of the world, innovation has to come from operators of golf clubs, public and private.

[Jim Sherma]

This is a great program if it gets the rake and runners off early and on time.  Gotta love finally having proof that lower scores equals lower times.

I'm not sure that this is proof of "lower scores equals lower times". It does show that it takes less time to hit less shots for golfers that are committed to playing fast. If someone is not committed to playing fast the correlation may or may not hold.   

[BCowan]

They posted these follow up comments:

4/26/14 Update: We tested the 2-Hour Round idea for the first time on 4/26/14 at Deer Run GC in Victoria, MN with 12 golfers. Six 2-somes tee’d off using the first 30 minutes of tee times for the day. They were able to tee off every 4 minutes. The first group finished in 2 hours and 4 minutes and the last group finished in 2 hours and 27 minutes. Here’s what we learned:
- Golfers that shot in the 70′s finished right around 2:00.
- Golfers that shoot in the 80′s finished in 2:15-2:20.
- Golfers that shoot in the 90′s finished in 2:20-2:30.
- None of the golfers felt “rushed”.
- 75% of golfers said they would not have been able to play that day if it was a normal 4 hour round because of other commitments that day.
- 100% of golfers said they enjoyed it and would do it again if offered.
- View pics from the day at www.2HourGolf.com
- Times when this would work for courses are either a) the 1st hour of tee times of the day or b) Twilight if the course blocks off the teesheet for 2 hours before the 1st 2-Hour round teetime.
- We’re going to test it again at a different courses to see if the results vary. Our goal is to have 10-15 more MN courses try this locally then expand the concept nationwide in the fall. If other courses are interested in trying this idea, please contact Kevin Unterreiner at info@twincitiesgolf.com.

Mike, thanks for the data.  Some of it was my hunch prior to you posting.  Who on this site has to look at a clock to see if they are playing in under 4 hours?  Hopefully Shackelford will post this!

[Josh Tarble]

On Friday, a co-worker and I went out at lunch with the objective of a 2-hour round.  The course was open except for 2 4-somes, we have both played the course many times and it's neither exceptionally difficult nor does it feature any significant green to tee transitions.   I shot an 80 and he shot an 82.  We skipped 2 holes.

We were able to play in 112 minutes - about 7 minutes per hole, so if we had played all 18 would have put us in at 2 hours and 6 minutes.

I like to play pretty fast, so it didn't feel too rushed for me, but my playing partner said he felt pretty rushed the entire time.  We probably could have cut a few minutes off it as we both drove the ball pretty poorly.  2 hours is really fast but it's do-able. Regardless, it was fun to do and we definitely wouldn't have been able to get out over lunch if we hadn't committed to playing so quickly.

[D_Malley]

The only issue i see in trying to do this at most public courses is how it would effect the grounds crew in preparing the course.
Typically our grounds crew works in front of the first group each day changing holes, cutting greens, and raking bunkers.
They prefer the first groups to be foursomes so as they do not interfere with their work.

I am sure that there are ways to work around this, but i know i would have a hard time trying to convince my super of the benefit.

[John Kavanaugh]

I find it odd that a private club would have six twosomes interested in playing first thing on a Saturday morning.  Hopefully these guys will find out that they have something in common with each other and become a regular foursomes.  In reality with 4 min tee times they have to be so early that the true amount of time saved is being falsely stated.  It does however make perfect sense for married couples that are often shut out of morning play.

I like how they mention twilight play.  When does that start in MN, 8pm?  Even here down near Kentucky we can get in 18 starting at 7pm.

[Mike Sweeney]

I am sure that there are ways to work around this, but i know i would have a hard time trying to convince my super of the benefit.

Split the maintenance crew. Front 9 gets prepared at the end of the day, back 9 in the morning.

[John Kavanaugh]

I am sure that there are ways to work around this, but i know i would have a hard time trying to convince my super of the benefit.

Split the maintenance crew. Front 9 gets prepared at the end of the day, back 9 in the morning.

This is Saturday morning.  How many people need to suffer for these 12 misfits?

[Mike Sweeney]

I am sure that there are ways to work around this, but i know i would have a hard time trying to convince my super of the benefit.

Split the maintenance crew. Front 9 gets prepared at the end of the day, back 9 in the morning.

This is Saturday morning.  How many people need to suffer for these 12 misfits?

Stop it. It was a trial that worked, get over it.

How many maintenance guys want to occasionally sleep in? Lots.

How many golfers want to play early and get home? Lots.

How many golfers want to play faster? Lots.

Of the many many people that have played Mountain Lake under this system, how many have complained here? At Mountain Lake the crew gets up very early and they work with headlights on to prepare the course. The question was how to do it at a public facility, and I offered a suggestion.

With the union at Yale, it won't work, unless the greenskeepers suggest it.

It is pretty simple. Golf can rate tee times and charge accordingly. The 2 hour golfer utilizes the asset in a shorter period of time and gets to pay less but also get less desired tee times early and late in the day.

The fat lazy cart riding golfer who lives off of tax dollars from non-goverment private sector golfers gets to tee off at prime time and pays more since he is using the asset for 4-5 hours. 

I love change, and you hate change. This is going to be fun

[John Kavanaugh]

Because of the 4 minute tee times you have multiple twosomes standing on the tee together and not joining up.  It's a perversion of community.

[Mike Sweeney]

Because of the 4 minute tee times you have multiple twosomes standing on the tee together and not joining up.  It's a perversion of community.

During the NFL season, the locals and nationals play early on Sunday am and then meet after on Sunday and we all have lunch together. The locals go back to their houses or watch the 1:00 PM game on in the pool house together. The nationals squeeze in another round and then head to the airport.

It is community perfected by a club that has been through 3 or 4 Florida housing swings and has adjusted to the new world while maintaining its history and tradition.

My personal opinion is threesomes in 3 hours would solve a lot of golf problems. The problems are American foursomes playing their own ball. How many times do we need the UK guys to tell us how to play team matches to get around.

Even the PGA Tour has figured this out.

[Jason Thurman]

Why is this "test" being called a success? Not a single group finished on time. And in light of that, I'm a little creeped out at John's ability to find correlation in seemingly unrelated systems and use it to predict the future.

Children are no longer taught how to take responsibility for their own happiness. They are declared winners for just showing up. This type of strict behavior modified relaxation is a byproduct of that system.

[Dan Kelly]

I find it odd that a private club would have six twosomes interested in playing first thing on a Saturday morning.  Hopefully these guys will find out that they have something in common with each other and become a regular foursomes.  In reality with 4 min tee times they have to be so early that the true amount of time saved is being falsely stated.  It does however make perfect sense for married couples that are often shut out of morning play.

I like how they mention twilight play.  When does that start in MN, 8pm?  Even here down near Kentucky we can get in 18 starting at 7pm.

1. It's not a private club. It's a public course.

2. Deer Run's rates seem to drop around 5 o'clock. I'd guess that's their definition of "twilight."