Teaching Pace of Play (architecture related)

[Carl Johnson]

Lots of our treads on architectural topics morph into pace of play discussions, and rightly so, because there are concerns about the relationship between designs and pace of play.  E.g., this thread: http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,60239.0.html

How to improve the pace of play mindset of golfers?  My idea, for starters, would be for golf teachers (teaching pros) to hone in on pace of play issues.  Although I have limited experience, such as it is tells me that teaching pros think their job is simply to teach mechanics, and then maybe course management from a shot-making standpoint.  I had a group lesson within the past 10 years when an LPGA teaching-certified pro advocated the "line on the ball" (a/k/a by some, the "cheater line) method of putting.  So, I stand around and watch average recreational players spend an inordinate about of time lining up the line, and I don't see how it helps them at all -- but it does slow down the game.  It seems to me that teaching pros should do just the opposite -- "shame" the use of the line and teach putting without it.

Every teaching pro lesson, group and individual, for beginners, including children, should have a strong component on pace of play.  Teach fundamental skills and course management, but never let a lesson go by without some discussion of pace of play issues.  Beyond that, have specific lessons simply on pace of play.  I'm not going to get into specifics of what should be taught -- we all know that.

Is my experience with teaching pros not representative?  Is it possible for teaching pros to teach pace of play?  Some might say that's not what the average golfer wants to pay them for.  I say, do it anyway and let's see what happens.

TV guys, including TGC, could help too, but lots of luck there. 

[Brent Hutto]

Teaching pros nowadays are very focused on what they consider "mental game" training. The vast majority of those teachings are aimed at getting player to DO MORE STUFF before actually swinging at the ball. Good luck getting them to give that up in favor of teaching golfers to just get on with the golf instead of various forms of procrastination.

I remember 10+ years ago I had the chance to spend time in some clinics and such featuring a mental-game coach who has now gone on to work with many notable players, including several on the PGA Tour. Back then a huge portion of his training had to do with being decisive and, for most people myself included, trying to trim down any delays between arriving at the ball and pulling the trigger on the swing. Even standing there with a stopwatch on the driving range and having the player start over if they had not hit the shot within a few seconds.

I don't know when all that got derailed in favor of teaching golfers to slow down, hit no shot before you are absolutely totally sure you are ready, inserting various physical and mental checklists in the pre-shot preparation and just generally adding time rather than eliminating unnecessary delays. But it's a whole different syllabus now, apparently. Pity.

[Paul Gray]

Certainly getting them early, when possible, if a huge advantage. Certainly, as Brent points out, you won't be getting any teaching pros helping with this any time soon.

I've been fortunate enough to act as a mentor to a number of junior golfers and fortunate therein to pass on what was taught to me. The whole essence of it for me is about instilling two fundamental thoughts:

1) It is your responsibility to care about other people.

Just because you have the time to play slowly doesn't mean you should try to enforce that pace on anyone else. If you're holding anyone else up, don't get waylaid with considering whether you're fast or slow. Nobody actually thinks they're slow. And, regardless, it's all relative. Simply get out of the way when you're clearly not as quick as the group behind. If you happen to be the group behind and you're playing through, do so with as little fuss as possible. Hit and walk. Repeat.

2) Understand that you benefit from all of this.

Golfers on a golf course are part of their very own society. Just as we have common rules in society which allow us all to go about our business more efficiently, so it is on a golf course. If you learn to play with consideration, and everyone else does likewise, you're going to get round in the amount of time which suits you. That might mean that you call a few groups through or it might mean you get called through a few times. So long as nobody hogs the middle lane, everyone can progress as they please.

As I said, getting them young is a huge advantage. If you get them when they're older, forget about the first point. The only way you can get it across to adults is to explain the benefits to them. Clubs have to actively promote this and accept in the bargain that feathers may be ruffled. The plus side is, and I speak from experience, you tend to separate the wheat from the chaff in the process as the bargain bucket end of the market, the end which not only wants cheap green fees but also spends very little in the Pro Shop and bar, tends to complain and often moves elsewhere. The positive however is that your higher paying customers tend to warm to the idea, particularly when they realise that the tone of the club has improved a little. They bring their friends along and consider membership. Golfers are a snobby bunch.
  
I've heard this dismissed as wishful thinking. Clearly memories are short. What's more, there are any number of golf clubs left where exactly this approach still exists and still works extremely well. The proof is out there. The wheel does not need to be reinvented. It's in that little rule book which you pick a copy up of every few years and it's there because it works.  

[Peter Pallotta]

Brent - it doesnt take a cynic to suggest that your old mental-game coach decided that there was no money in teaching golfers how to  do LESS.
Peter

[Peter Pallotta]

Paul - good post, thanks.

Carl - more to your point, but in line with what I wrote to Brent: sometimes I fear that everyone in golf (owners, architects, supers, manufacturers) have decided that there is no money in doing less, which I do believe contributes in several ways to pace of play issues, including by creating an evironment in  which the well-heeled golfers who are paying the freight feel justified in taking as much time as they damn well please to play a round of golf.
Peter

[Steve_ Shaffer]

For cartball courses, I suggest a sign on the back of each cart:

"How would you like to be playing behind your group?"

[John Percival]

Carl,
Am retired from teaching, but in my work, especially with beginners, tried to educate on all aspects of the game.
In the course of a 30 minute lesson, it's not difficult to take 1 minute, especially during a mini-break, to help the newbies become aware.
In fact, one of the great concerns of the novice is playing with others. A very simple transition, then, becomes making that a non issue. I used to tell them that players don't care much about ur game's quality, they care about ur game's pace. That made pace so much more relevant for them and made any subsequent advice on the matter appreciated.

Unfortunately, so many people derive their course info from TV, where 2somes play in 4 hours. Ouch.

[Philip Hensley]

I saw a guy on the first tee yesterday, an amateur high school or junior college player, that has a pre shot routine for his practice swings! And does two full practice swings!

[Paul Gray]

John,

I never thought of that angle but you are of course absolutely right. Great approach.

Philip,

I genuinely just laughed out loud when I read that. Thanks!

[Donnie Beck]

IMO there is nothing more destructive to pace of play than singles and twosomes allowed to play during peak hours. In my travels I seem to be seeing more and more of this in recent years. It is probably happening because courses don't want to turn away greens fees but whatever the reason it really screws up the pace of play. It may not seem like that big of deal to let a group play through but when they try to play through every group on the course things get slowed down in a hurry.

[John Percival]

Donnie,
ABSOLUTELY.
Shud b a standing rule that singles and twos are paired whenever possible. Up to maybe 4 PM.
After all, there is supposed to b some social interaction.
And the pace, not to mention availability, of the course suffers with the singles and doubles.

Much easier to do at a public/resort cse, as some members at privates 'insist' on their own quirks.
That's when it falls on the club to institute rules.

Unfortunately, sometimes the single or duce is an asshole(s) and probably shud be alone.

[Duncan Cheslett]

What is the most efficient way to get the most golfers through a golf course?

At my club our Wednesday competitions have always been in 2 or 3-balls, 4-balls being prohibited because of pace of play issues. This year however, 4-balls are to be allowed in Stableford comps, to the fury of certain members.

With evening light a scarce commodity however, is it not sensible to play in 4-balls as more players will get round, albeit in maybe an extra 15 minutes per group?

What is the most efficient number of players per group?

[Brent Hutto]

I have to laugh when I hear all this outrage at singles and twosomes playing golf. It has been YEARS since any course I play at has faced the problem of efficiently getting the maximum number of golfers through the course.

From our local perspective, having to jam everyone into foursomes and send them out every eight or nine minutes due to excess demand for tee times seems like a first-world problem.

[Paul Gray]

I have to laugh when I hear all this outrage at singles and twosomes playing golf. It has been YEARS since any course I play at has faced the problem of efficiently getting the maximum number of golfers through the course.

From our local perspective, having to jam everyone into foursomes and send them out every eight or nine minutes due to excess demand for tee times seems like a first-world problem.

Overheads. Blame the excesses of aesthetics for this nonsense. I know of any number of courses that lose money if it's not at least half full. That means fourballs at peak times but has nothing to do with pace and everything to do with revenue. And then, because costs run so close to potential revenue, we have to listen to people telling us that golf is dieing because the tarted up swamp with a host of expensive 'features' might be facing closure.

[Niall C]

Carl

When I grew up and was introduced to golf by my parents it was them that taught me etiquette and how to behave on the golf course. Indeed they spent a good bit more time on that than teaching me about the golf swing. I expect many of my generation were the same. Where the problem started creeping into the game, in my opinion, was when a wave of players who were completely new to the game arrived in the 1990's (?). They had no experience or help to fall back on, and simply didn't know any better and that unfortunately became the norm. I also doubt Scotland is any different to the US in this regard.

The only time I've seen it addressed was when I joined Silloth. A whole batch of potentially new members were interviewed by the club captain and vice captain on the same day with many of the questions focusing on etiquette. The new members were then taken out on mass to the 18th green to be shown the proper way to rake a bunker and where to leave the rake, and also how to repair a plug mark (wrongly as it happens but the thought was there).

Having been accepted as a member each new member was then obliged to take a series of lessons from the pro. In my case the pro assessed I was reasonably competent after a few knocks (he caught me on a good day) and there was no need for the other lessons. I've been a member of several other clubs and when joining they have seemed to asume that I already knew how to act on the golf course. Having seen some of the antics by some of the other members at those clubs I'd respectively suggest it was a wrong assumption.

Now having said all that, not sure how it relates to the architecture of a course.

Niall
  

[jeffwarne]

IMO there is nothing more destructive to pace of play than singles and twosomes allowed to play during peak hours. In my travels I seem to be seeing more and more of this in recent years. It is probably happening because courses don't want to turn away greens fees but whatever the reason it really screws up the pace of play. It may not seem like that big of deal to let a group play through but when they try to play through every group on the course things get slowed down in a hurry.

100% spot on.
Some of my fondest memories as a child was showing up at the club alone and having the pro pair me up (9 times out of 10 with an adult group)
this led to many games in the future and a chance to meet a lot of great people.
Amazing how seldom people want to meet others it seems these days.

a Full course in peak times needs a speed limit-both a minimum and a max.
a single or duo not going off early expecting to play in 2 3/4 hours is as misplaced as a fourball thinking they can play in 5.
We have this discussion frequently here and no doubt many will chime in it takes no time to let a group through but that is utter nonsense.
letting three twoballs through will slow a fourball down considerably and disrupt flow throughout the course.
Want to play a two ball?
Play earlier, play later, or join a club where peak 2 ball play is the norm.
Even in the UK they generally segregate 2,3, and 4 ball play at many popular PRIVATE clubs to make it all work.


Niall has it right.
In the late 90's a bunch of people started playing golf as the game grew in a fast burst.
Not enough of these people were trained sensibly as Niall was, and the result was bunch of TV trained PGA Tour worshiping knuckleheads.
Money definitely played into it also as clubs needing members and "Country Clubs for a Day" (even typing this makes me want to vomit) needed players willing to spend big on green fees.
Paying a high fee often makes players feel entitled. a sad fact that only rarely can be successfully addressed by demand or in rare cases, by education.

[Paul Gray]

Niall,

Spot on. I don't bemoan the fact that golf opened up in the 1980's. It needed to. But it was something of a gold rush and certainly little to no thought was given to etiquette.

My club does something similar to Silloth with anyone that declares themselves to be a beginner. And as a tenuous link to architecture, it's all about understanding the nuances of the golf course, the environs, if you like.  

[Paul Gray]

Higher Standards on GCA:

Could we please ensure that vowels on not absented from words. We are not fourteen year olds exchanging text messages.

[Wayne_Freedman]

And yet the the game is losing younger players because they say, "It takes too long."
Who is taking too long?
A good proportion of them are the younger players.

[Carl Johnson]

Carl

When I grew up and was introduced to golf by my parents it was them that taught me etiquette and how to behave on the golf course. . . . Where the problem started creeping into the game, in my opinion, was when a wave of players who were completely new to the game arrived in the 1990's (?). They had no experience or help to fall back on . . . .

Niall, good point.  A number of responses so far have focused not on "teaching" pace of play, but on management issues (e.g., requiring four balls at certain times) that are apparently necessary because golfers haven't learned to manage themselves.  I'm interested in who should do the teaching and how should it be done.  In your case, it was your parents.  But, as you point out, lots of new golfers don't have that kind of background today.  So, where do they get it?  The "sense of the meeting" so far seems to that, contrary to what I threw out there, "lot's of luck with the teaching pros taking this on."

The only time I've seen it addressed was when I joined Silloth. A whole batch of potentially new members were interviewed by the club captain and vice captain on the same day with many of the questions focusing on etiquette. The new members were then taken out on mass to the 18th green to be shown the proper way to rake a bunker and where to leave the rake, and also how to repair a plug mark (wrongly as it happens but the thought was there). . . .

So, what you're suggesting is that the club itself (here we assume a private club, setting aside for now the daily fee situation) undertake the task.  I agree.  I also love the idea of the "raking," etc. lesson for new members.  I'd include not only the right way to fix a plug mark, but how to repair divots (different for different types of grass, obviously), where to deposit trash (including cigarette butts) and how to reduce traffic wear.  The club could have pace of play lessons, could it not, for new members, and reminders for the old?  In the club situation, could not the club also require their pros (teaching and otherwise) to focus on teaching pace of play?  Then they wouldn't need to drive around in golf carts to tell players they are "behind."  

Now having said all that, not sure how it relates to the architecture of a course.

Not sure if this is your question, but it seems to me that a lot of our discussions about architecture involve considerations of pace of play in design.  If players were more pace of play oriented, wouldn't the architect be able to focus more on other issues?  And, wouldn't that be better?

Niall
  

[Eric Strulowitz]

Teaching pros nowadays are very focused on what they consider "mental game" training. The vast majority of those teachings are aimed at getting player to DO MORE STUFF before actually swinging at the ball. Good luck getting them to give that up in favor of teaching golfers to just get on with the golf instead of various forms of procrastination.

I remember 10+ years ago I had the chance to spend time in some clinics and such featuring a mental-game coach who has now gone on to work with many notable players, including several on the PGA Tour. Back then a huge portion of his training had to do with being decisive and, for most people myself included, trying to trim down any delays between arriving at the ball and pulling the trigger on the swing. Even standing there with a stopwatch on the driving range and having the player start over if they had not hit the shot within a few seconds.

I don't know when all that got derailed in favor of teaching golfers to slow down, hit no shot before you are absolutely totally sure you are ready, inserting various physical and mental checklists in the pre-shot preparation and just generally adding time rather than eliminating unnecessary delays. But it's a whole different syllabus now, apparently. Pity.

Excellent post Brent.

I was at the bookstore the other day and was looking through all the golf books, and so many books out there regarding the mental aspects of the game.  Skimming through them,  the theme is basically the same.  Going through a mental checklist each time before you hit, eliminating superfluous mental thoughts, seeing the target and not the ball, tension free setup  etc.  It seems that a lot of these writers are stressing eliminating the mechanical thoughts and replacing them with mental thoughts.   The main mental thought is being not to have no mental thoughts, so you stand at the tee trying to free your mind of all thoughts, that takes just  as long as taking several practice swings. 

What other sport puts its players through all this?   It just makes uptight players a whole lot more uptight IMHO, and slows the game down even more for those of us who just want to keep moving.

[jeffwarne]

Let's not confuse slow playing students with teachers teaching slow play.

The same players who would never think of trying to tackle an NFL running back, hiting a major league fastball. or dunking over Shaq,
think they're one good "mental" article away from hitting it like Tiger....err...Rory.

[Brent Hutto]

Jeff,

I'd settle for hitting it like Tiger. Absolutely.

P.S. I already have the chipping yips part down cold.

[John Percival]

First of all, all my words will be spelled out from now on  

Taking Jeff's comments one step further, one must differentiate teaching an elite am or a tour pro from teaching a beginner.
Anyone who thinks the thought process is the same is definitely missing something.

Meat and potatoes for the newbies. Both in swing thoughts and course thoughts.

Those elite players need fine tuning at the highest level, both on their exquisite swings and their mental acumen. Looking at a putt from two directions might mean a 1 shot difference in their round. And at the elite level, one shot per four rounds is top ten vs middle of the pack. That isn't conducive to faster play, but it probably will improve THEIR scoring.

PLEASE DO NOT THINK THAT I AM CONDONING SLOW PLAY. I HATE SLOW PLAY.

We just need to remember to apply the appropriate response to the situation.

[Jon Wiggett]

Playing at a reasonable speed has nothing to do with ability but rather is a conscious decision to maintain a decent pace. There is absolutely no reason why a three ball playing in a PGA Tour event should not complete 18 holes in three and a half hours. As for the rest of us it is down to us to ensure that we and the other players in our group and that in front allow a decent pace of play.

Jon