How to make golf less expensive and/or take less time to play - ref other thread

[Thomas Dai]

A sister thread to this one - https://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,68649.0.html - the opposites to make the game less expensive and/or take less time to play.

Here are a few as starters -
Let’s make the greens slower
Let’s have inconsistent sand in all the bunkers
Let’s make shorter holes
Let’s have less rough
Let’s have golf balls that don’t go as far
Let’s have clubs that don’t hit the ball as far
Those who didn’t understand the nature of the previous sister post may wish to review their initial responses from the opposite perspective.

 
Atb

[Jon Wiggett]

A sister thread to this one - https://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,68649.0.html - the opposites to make the game less expensive and/or take less time to play.

Here are a few as starters -
Let’s make the greens slower
Let’s have inconsistent sand in all the bunkers
Let’s make shorter holes
Let’s have less rough
Let’s have golf balls that don’t go as far
Let’s have clubs that don’t hit the ball as far
Those who didn’t understand the nature of the previous sister post may wish to review their initial responses from the opposite perspective.

 
Atb

🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑




Baaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Thomas Dai]

🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑
Baaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!!!!!!!

Atb

[Lou_Duran]

I probably missed the nuanced intent of its "sister", so I could be off on this one as well.


But, if an M.D. made a similar prescription for something that ails me, I may look into his training or for further information in the medical directory under "Quacks".


We have such a course in my middle-class housing development, a cute 9-hole par 3 with holes ranging from 70-100 yards.  It is "free" to homeowners and their guests (we won't go into my HOA dues), as well as anyone else who has befriended the guards or obtained the pass code for the visitor gate.  The greens are maybe one generation removed from Common Bermuda, mowed three times each week during the season to bounce around 5'-6' after they're freshly cut.  Bunker sand is whatever cheap stuff they get once a year; rakes and drainage are non-existent.  My wife and her friends play it every morning.  It takes all of :45 to play with multiple shots (I've supplied her group with balls, mostly ones on David's approved list, and a full 3'x2'x3' box in March is now down to about 20 or 30 balls).


Prior to Covid, the course was so sparingly used that the board considered closing it down and maintain it as part of the surrounding landscape (according to a board member, that would have saved around $5k annually, hardly putting a dent in the budget).  Since Covid, the course has become an all-purpose facility serving golfers, fishermen, dog walkers, picnickers, bands of young teens doing who knows what, etc.     


Yes, the suggestions would definitely make golf less expensive and take less time to lay.  But they would also take the joy, charm, and challenge out of the game, likely killing it.


As to the Scots' apparent fascination with sheep, it is also something that I've failed to pick up on.  Hopefully it is not of the sort suggested by the following.


 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qZcrFHqQRPU

[Jon Wiggett]

I don't understand what is funny about accusing sheep of lying 


Lou,


as for the reason for the par 3 course not being used it has to do with human nature. If something is free then people will not value it. But free is not the same as something being low cost.

[Jerry Kluger]

Does anyone believe that it took less time to play a round of golf on an 18 hole golf course of 6,000+ yards 10, 20 or 30 years ago - I don't.  I have been playing for nearly 50 years, (although the quality of my game doesn't demonstrate that experience makes your game better), and I don't remember it taking any less time to play a round at the time I started versus the time now.  I don't see any reason why a course which does not wander through a housing development, should not be played in less than 4 hours.  I can walk the courses at my club in less than 4 hours without any trouble and they are in a housing development with some long walks between holes.  It isn't rocket science to realize that if you play ready golf, line up your putt before it is your turn and skip all the bs that you can play quickly.  Golf can take a long time if every shot you hit is the most important shot you will ever it. On the other hand, if a round of golf only took one hour I wouldn't enjoy it as much.   

[Sean_A]

Jerry No Apologies

I don't ever recall flying around a course as 4ball in 3 hours. I believe most of the fast golf stories we here from yesteryear were 2ball games or very good players. That said, I have no doubt that playing a 6000 yard course is much quicker than a 6700 yard course. I also have no doubt that 30 years ago Brits played quicker than than Yanks. That is no longer necessarily the case.

Ciao

[Kalen Braley]

Jerry,

While I fundamentally agree with you, the issue remains its a few bad apples that ruin the entire barrel.

A few slow groups here and there, especially early in the day, and the entire course grinds to a slow death march.  And its contagious with its own negative feedback loop.  First couple times it happens maybe its frustration, or even anger, but soon that's replaced with apathy where its conceded the round will take 5+ hours before you even put the first tee in the ground.  Eventually most end up playing slow, almost as a coping mechanism of sorts, and it further compounds.

Perhaps at small clubs members can self-police, but at joe blow muni in under-served public golf markets like LA, SF, NY, etc its just part and parcel. Towards the end of my time in the Bay area, I figured if it was going to be a 6 hour activity, I may as well drive 1.5 hours round trip further out and play a more interesting and less crowded course that I could get around in 4-4.5 hours.

[Jason Thurman]

My reaction was similar to Lou's - where I'm from, lots of courses reflect these criteria, or at least many of them. Central KY is full of short courses with slow greens, inconsistent sand/dirt bunkers, short rough, and a significant portion of the clientele playing with older equipment. If you find an abandoned ball at Longview Golf Course, it won't be a ProV1.


They're mostly cheap as hell too. I just saw today that I can play Canewood during peak weekend hours with a cart for $34. Canewood isn't some slummy dirt-cheap dogtrack either. In a county with four public golf courses, Canewood is the second "nicest." I don't think I ever paid more than $40 for a round of golf until I moved out of the state after college.


Kentucky has lots of cheap golf. I don't find that cheap and fast always go hand-in-hand - as a rule of thumb, the more check boxes from the OP's list that course delivers, the more time I'd expect your weekend round to take. And while I love these courses dearly, I also like a good stout hole here and there, greens that run above 9, and my TaylorMade Original One.

[Lou_Duran]

Jerry No Apologies

I don't ever recall flying around a course as 4ball in 3 hours. I believe most of the fast golf stories we here from yesteryear were 2ball games or very good players. That said, I have no doubt that playing a 6000 yard course is much quicker than a 6700 yard course. I also have no doubt that 30 years ago Brits played quicker than than Yanks. That is no longer necessarily the case.

Ciao

We walk a course of 6800+ yards from the second set of tees in 2:40 to 3:00 regularly, often as a four-ball.  It is 5.4 miles on average from the 1st tee to the 18th green within a residential development with a few sizable but manageable walks between some greens and tees.  We typically have the first tee time at 8:00 and we're often third or fourth off to allow faster groups to jump in front of us.  There are some riding 4-balls which play in 2:45 and any number of 2-balls who play faster than that.  I am not saying that this is the optimal pace, but it is doable if playing fast is an objective.


To Jerry's point, back in the 1970s we had a regular weekend game at Ohio State's Scarlet course with as many as 12 players on a given day.  If we were off early, we might get around in 4:15.  After 8:30, it was 4:30+.  40 years later and on a 200+ longer, more difficult course, we played one beautiful mid-day Saturday in 3:45.  I know one data point proves nothing, but I don't remember ever playing Scarlet in under 4 hours unless there was a football game going on and the weather was really bad.


Jon,


I never knew that sheep are smart enough to be deceitful.  But maybe the way Mel Brooks portrayed Daisy captured their true nature. 


BTW, I don't know if you've played Southerndown in Wales, but in addition to being a wonderful course, its sheep were the most attractive and best behaved I have seen.  No electricity was required to keep the sheep off the greens and not once did one bleat at the top of my back swing.  The livestock at Pennard could learn something from them.   

[Jeff Schley]

How about embracing the two ball or foursomes format in the mornings? At least at private clubs several days a week. I hadn't played much alternate shot until a couple years ago in the UK and on some golf trips. It really grew on me for 2 reasons primarily.

• We were done in around 3 hours
• The team aspect and camaraderie I think was amplified.

Isn't golf a social game to be enjoyed with others for recreation? I think those formats check all the boxes.

[Jon Wiggett]

Jon,


I never knew that sheep are smart enough to be deceitful.  But maybe the way Mel Brooks portrayed Daisy captured their true nature. 

Lou,


Sheep are really smart. Douglas Adams got it almost right but it wasn't mice it is sheep and we are just lab rats. I realised this after my second Pan Galactic Gargle Blaster.

[Tom_Doak]

How about embracing the two ball or foursomes format in the mornings? At least at private clubs several days a week. I hadn't played much alternate shot until a couple years ago in the UK and on some golf trips. It really grew on me for 2 reasons primarily.

• We were done in around 3 hours
• The team aspect and camaraderie I think was amplified.

Isn't golf a social game to be enjoyed with others for recreation? I think those formats check all the boxes.

The easiest way to speed up the game is to play more two-ball matches.


The reason it cannot be considered (or even mentioned) in the USA is that nearly every course is trying to maximize revenue, rather than enjoyment.  Even the private clubs!  So weekend mornings must book a four ball in every slot.

[Jason Thurman]

COVID has taught me many things about golf, including the following about pace of play (assuming reasonable spacing of tee times):


1. A course full of walkers will likely play faster than a course with a lot of two-person carts.
2. A course full of single-rider carts will likely play faster than a course full of walkers (unless it's CPO).


The need to get outside for unbridled joy every now and then has also reminded my wife and I how much we love riding our electric scooters.


Therefore, I submit that the best way to make golf less expensive and time-consuming, at least in the US, is to encourage the proliferation of the GolfBoard. A cursory internet search reveals that a GolfBoard may already cost less than half of a golf cart, and I would expect pricing to get better as they become more widespread. Two GolfBoards also have a smaller storage footprint than a single golf cart.


So, theoretically, a course could charge the same fees for 'Boarders without any real impact to operating costs, and thus create a whole course of single riders. Three hour rounds become the norm, and moving around the course provides more unbridled joy than ever.

[Bernie Bell]

1/. What prevents US golfers from playing foursomes golf if they find it more enjoyable?  Nothing at my club. 

2/. If COVID golf is unbridled joy, why such a hurry to get off the course?  Enjoy the walk. 

[Tim Martin]

Foursomes will not catch on in the U.S. as most people want to hit all the shots. The option was set in motion long ago across the pond but has never made its way to the U.S on a large scale. It’s certainly an option at private clubs if there is enough interest.

[Kalen Braley]

Foursomes will not catch on in the U.S. as most people want to hit all the shots. The option was set in motion long ago across the pond but has never made its way to the U.S on a large scale. It’s certainly an option at private clubs if there is enough interest.

Agreed here Tim,


And if I had to guess, other than some slots on Saturday or Sunday mornings, most privates probably aren't afflicted with wall to wall packed tee sheets and slow play.

[Sean_A]

Jerry No Apologies

I don't ever recall flying around a course as 4ball in 3 hours. I believe most of the fast golf stories we here from yesteryear were 2ball games or very good players. That said, I have no doubt that playing a 6000 yard course is much quicker than a 6700 yard course. I also have no doubt that 30 years ago Brits played quicker than than Yanks. That is no longer necessarily the case.

Ciao

We walk a course of 6800+ yards from the second set of tees in 2:40 to 3:00 regularly, often as a four-ball.  It is 5.4 miles on average from the 1st tee to the 18th green within a residential development with a few sizable but manageable walks between some greens and tees.  We typically have the first tee time at 8:00 and we're often third or fourth off to allow faster groups to jump in front of us.  There are some riding 4-balls which play in 2:45 and any number of 2-balls who play faster than that.  I am not saying that this is the optimal pace, but it is doable if playing fast is an objective.

To Jerry's point, back in the 1970s we had a regular weekend game at Ohio State's Scarlet course with as many as 12 players on a given day.  If we were off early, we might get around in 4:15.  After 8:30, it was 4:30+.  40 years later and on a 200+ longer, more difficult course, we played one beautiful mid-day Saturday in 3:45.  I know one data point proves nothing, but I don't remember ever playing Scarlet in under 4 hours unless there was a football game going on and the weather was really bad.

Jon,

I never knew that sheep are smart enough to be deceitful.  But maybe the way Mel Brooks portrayed Daisy captured their true nature. 

BTW, I don't know if you've played Southerndown in Wales, but in addition to being a wonderful course, its sheep were the most attractive and best behaved I have seen.  No electricity was required to keep the sheep off the greens and not once did one bleat at the top of my back swing.  The livestock at Pennard could learn something from them.   

Maybe I don't remember playing in 3 hours is because I am a slower player than that 😎.

Ciao

[Thomas Dai]

Maybe I don't remember playing in 3 hours is because I am a slower player than that 😎.

As to time to play, maybe modern day watches run on a different basis to the ones folks wore a few decades ago?
Maybe they now operate differently in different times zones too?
And as to the cost to play and many of its causes, well it doesn’t do the rep of the game any favours.

Atb

[John Kavanaugh]

Because we were not connected to our loved ones 24/7 back in the day we didn't live life by the minute. Every time we look at that phone the first thing we see is the time.

[Jon Wiggett]

Maybe I don't remember playing in 3 hours is because I am a slower player than that 😎.

As to time to play, maybe modern day watches run on a different basis to the ones folks wore a few decades ago?
Maybe they now operate differently in different times zones too?
And as to the cost to play and many of its causes, well it doesn’t do the rep of the game any favours.
 
Atb

I certainly remember most non comp rounds being under three hours and most comp rounds being between two and three quarter hours and three and a quarter. Three and a half was slow and four hours was something you occasionally saw on the TV. Always try to keep up with the group in front and ahead of the group behind was the mantra. Sadly, those days are gone.