[Anthony Gray]

 We all understand the Doak Scale. But what if there was a fun scale?


 The average golfer has a handicap of 16. So getting beat up on a Doak 9 or 10 might not be fun. Personally I have past up on Muirfield because I thought it would not be fun for me. I want to feel great after a round not exhausted.


 So what would a course have to have to get a 10 on the fun scale? Let’s look at this from a 10+ handicapper average golfer.


 What are some courses that qualify?


What should a Fun 10 have?


 -One drivable par 4


-A short par 3 around 100 yards


- Easy hole 18 to finish happy


 - Generous first hole to get warmed up


 - eye candy


 -three half pars that favor the course and four that favor the golfer on par 4s


 - one forced carry


- a waterfall and a volcano or castle in the distance


-highly contoured greens


-open to the public


- can walk it


- can change your shoes in the parking lot


-few bunkers


- hot dogs with a steamer for buns


- a course dog


- very long par 5 and short par 5


- quirk and more quirk


- a few bold features even if they are eye candy and don’t come into play


- lots of risk/reward


- one hole that is unfair and requires luck which evens the playing field with high and low handicappers


- zero false fronts
 
- one big tree to aim at


- any must have architectural features


- any absolutely not architectural features




 What makes a course FUN for the average gentleman golfer?


 I have short list for 10s
  Cruden Bay
  North Berwick
  Pacific Dunes


  9s
 Knob North
 White Day
 Diamanté (the first year it opened)
 Crail
 Prestwick


 

[Ally Mcintosh]

I think the term “fun” to describe golf courses has now jumped the shark.


There are many, many different ways to enjoy playing golf on golf courses. The more we try and define it in this happy-clappy way where the only fun golf courses have wild greens, half-par holes, quirk galore, short par-3’s and features that make us laugh out loud, the closer we get to promoting contrived and Disneyland architecture.


(Anthony - apologies for picking your thread for the above diatribe!).


For me, golf is made more fun when I have to hit loads of different shot types because of firm conditions and wind. I also happen to enjoy the challenge of a medal round on a tough course. I consider that fun too. For others, it may be different.

[Anthony Gray]

I think the term “fun” to describe golf courses has now jumped the shark.


There are many, many different ways to enjoy playing golf on golf courses. The more we try and define it in this happy-clappy way where the only fun golf courses have wild greens, half-par holes, quirk galore, short par-3’s and features that make us laugh out loud, the closer we get to promoting contrived and Disneyland architecture.


(Anthony - apologies for picking your thread for the above diatribe!).


For me, golf is made more fun when I have to hit loads of different shot types because of firm conditions and wind. I also happen to enjoy the challenge of a medal round on a tough course. I consider that fun too. For others, it may be different.

  I think you are missing the point. For the 16 handicapper courses that are difficult and demand the golfer to always be a accurate or be punished are not Fun. Victoria National is not a course I see as fun. I was a member at a course in Tennessee and it was such a test of golf for the average golfer that it was not fun for the higher handicappers. The par 4 finish was not reachable in two by many players. That’s not fun for the average golfer. You knew before your round you were going to limp home. 16 was long, 17 a par 3 over water and 18 unreachable in regulation. Greg Norman design.


 Here we go again with an English language lesson.


 Fun as in a course you would play everyday.


 Fun as in “if you only had one course to play for the rest of your life”’


 Fun as in “I’m not even going to keep score today”


 Fun as in the course never gets old.


 Just plain F U N


 The crew I play with would not choose Oakmont to play everyday. That would not be fun for them.


 I was at The Honors with some patients and on the 15th hole one gentleman golfer was in the water off the tee. He was in the water again on his second at which time he shouted “thirteen”!  The caddy looked at me and said we on on the 15th. I replied he’s counting how many balls he’s lost. So The Honors was not FUN for him. Did he enjoy the round? Of course but it’s not a fun course. But he would think Cruden Bay would be. Or with it’s short finish and quirk North Berwick. In the clubhouse he would say “now that was fun”.


 What’s more F U N for Garland? Wine Valley or Sherwood Country Club? He’s going to go with Wine Valley which is an strong 8 and where he spanked Kalen’s heinie as opposed to Sherwood which is a 6.5.


 Face it. Some courses are too great of a test of golf to be fun for the guy that’s trying to get away from his wife for a few hours. So what are some of the courses that provide that perfect balance  of challenge with quirk and give you that all star Saturday.


 Pasatiempo is Spanish for pastime. Hobby. No one wants to be frustrated finding that Johnny Bench rookie card.


 After playing Cruden Bay that was 10 day for me. The Honors a 7. When I go back to West Virginia I’m playing white day over Pete Dye.


 Maybe I should have said if Fun had a top 100 list than what course would be in the top 5? I’m purring Cruden Bay ahead of Pebble Beach, NGLA, Royal Dornach, Seminole and TOC. Because Cruden Bay is a Fun 10.


 Golf is fun of course. But if we can put a numerical value to a golf course based on fun I’m going with Cruden Bay as the Bo Derek of golf and Victoria National as Katherine Bates. North Berwick as The Godfather and Kiawa as Ishtar.


 Anthony


 

[Ally Mcintosh]

I’m not missing the point, Anthony.


Fun has become a catch-all word used to promote golf courses as somehow “better” and I think it means less and less the more we use it.

[Sean_A]

Fun is different for everybody and I dare say most people's idea of fun changes over time. I know fun when I have it. Golf is taking a severe turn at the moment where fun seems to be about how much extra can be provided to add to the enjoyment....at a cost. Even that is somewhat understandable compared to so many places offering no more than previously except inflated green fees.

Generally speaking less is more for me. Less yardage, less dead walks, less rough, less green speed, less fuss and less cost.

Ciao

[Anthony Gray]

Fun is different for everybody and I dare say most people's idea of fun changes over time. I know fun when I have it. Golf is taking a severe turn at the moment where fun seems to be about how much extra can be provided to add to the enjoyment....at a cost. Even that is somewhat understandable compared to so many places offering no more than previously except inflated green fees.

Generally speaking less is more for me. Less yardage, less dead walks, less rough, less green speed, less fuss and less cost.

Ciao

 Years ago there seemed to be push for lightning fast greens. I remember watching average -layers putting off greens and just picking up. Not Fun. Scranton Country Club member told me the knew super came in and the members started four putting and loved it.
 
 Not sure if not breaking a 100 is more fun than an 89.


The course I mentioned as 10 are not particularly easy but very playable with interest on every hole. Don’t have cookie cutter bunkers placed at the same place on each hole. Etc.

[Anthony Gray]

I’m not missing the point, Anthony.


Fun has become a catch-all word used to promote golf courses as somehow “better” and I think it means less and less the more we use it.

 Ally. God help us. Iconic, signature and now fun are words that are taboo when discussing gca. I’m going to have to find different adjectives. Maybe sexy, hard on hard or erotic. What’s the sexiest hazard? What courses are hard on hard?  The most erotic opening hole? We need a thread “Golf Course Architecture and it’s new adjectives.” since everything else is overused.


 Help us Gib 🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼

[Ally Mcintosh]

Go for it, Anthony.


I’ve just had it with the use of “fun” to promote a certain type of course whilst trying to imply that certain other types of course are not “fun” and somehow lesser for it.


Courses are either good or they are not.

[Niall C]

I suspect that Carnoustie wouldn't be near the top of anyone's fun list however I love that course and have had loads of fun getting beaten up on it. Fun is in the eye of the beholder.


Niall

[Michael Felton]

I'd say a good definition of fun is a course where if you hit good shots you'll be rewarded and if you hit bad shots you'll be rewarded with an opportunity to recover. So not too much water around, but plenty of contour. To my mind, the most fun course I've played is NGLA. I haven't played Cruden Bay, but I'm curious what it has that NGLA doesn't. NGLA is plenty wide enough that you can spray it a little from the tee, but challenging enough that you're better off hitting it in the right places. I've not lost a ball there in the two rounds I've played and haven't really looked like losing one either. But it has some devilish spots around the greens you can find yourself where you have to play a really good shot to get it close. That sort of thing is fun to me. Where I can open my shoulders and hit it anywhere, but my score fritters away if I'm not on point.

[Ally Mcintosh]

To pick up where Niall left off, what if I have more fun at Carnoustie than I do at Cruden Bay? What if I said I’d love to play Carnoustie every day whereas I’m not sure I could find the same enjoyment in playing Cruden Bay every day?


Anthony - I have hijacked your thread. I’m sorry. It’s not that I don’t know where you’re coming from. I’m just trying to stop lazy pigeon holing of courses in to either “fun” or “challenging” buckets with the former seeing favour in the last 15 years and the latter being talked down in oh so subtle ways.


I’ll take my morning golf at Carnoustie and my evening golf at Cruit Island. That’s a real difference.

[Ben Stephens]

To pick up where Niall left off, what if I have more fun at Carnoustie than I do at Cruden Bay? What if I said I’d love to play Carnoustie every day whereas I’m not sure I could find the same enjoyment in playing Cruden Bay every day?


Anthony - I have hijacked your thread. I’m sorry. It’s not that I don’t know where you’re coming from. I’m just trying to stop lazy pigeon holing of courses in to either “fun” or “challenging” buckets with the former seeing favour in the last 15 years and the latter being talked down in oh so subtle ways.


I’ll take my morning golf at Carnoustie and my evening golf at Cruit Island. That’s a real difference.

Carnoustie is a sleeping giant a cracking course IMO and rough on the edges. I love playing there.

[Mark_Fine]

Anthony,
I am presuming all your points make up your definition of fun which is perfectly fine.  Many are not architecture related but that is fine too.  What you are pointing out is why almost any kind of list is so varied and so subjective.  Fun is not universally defined.  For me personally, I think more sets of teeing choices has the biggest impact on fun and can bring more people back into the game.  Most courses are far too long and take too long for many golfers to play (male and female).


I’m in PA and it is cold here now.  Our course is still open but there are no tee markers out.  When we play now we take turns teeing it up literally anywhere at any yardage.  We call that fun[size=78%] [/size]

[Thomas Dai]

Maybe the best indication of golfing fun is walking off the last green smiling?
atb

[Bruce Katona]

The "Fun" scale for most customers can many times boil down to "looks hard, plays more than fair".  The customer loves to regale his playing partners and anyone else who will listen how he/she "slayed the long par 5, stuffed his/her tee ball on the par 3 for birdie and lipped out on 18 to tie his/her best ever score."


Deliver that experience and you'll have repeat customers and a booked tee sheet.

[Stewart Abramson]

What should a Fun 10 have?

 -One drivable par 4

-A short par 3 around 100 yards

- Easy hole 18 to finish happy

 - Generous first hole to get warmed up

- eye candy

-three half pars that favor the course and four that favor the golfer on par 4s

- one forced carry

- a waterfall and a volcano or castle in the distance

-highly contoured greens

-open to the public

- can walk it

- can change your shoes in the parking lot

-few bunkers

- hot dogs with a steamer for buns

- a course dog

- very long par 5 and short par 5

- quirk and more quirk

- a few bold features even if they are eye candy and don’t come into play

- lots of risk/reward

- one hole that is unfair and requires luck which evens the playing field with high and low handicappers

- zero false fronts
 
- one big tree to aim at

- any must have architectural features

- any absolutely not architectural features

 What makes a course FUN for the average gentleman golfer?

I don't think a list of specific ingredients can be used to define what makes a course fun to play. Most of the ingredients you listed neither increase nor decrease the likelihood of a course being fun to play. I couldn't care less about where I change my shoes A few of the listed items detract from the fun factor.


I approximate an average senior golfer (12.5 index, short hitter) I like courses with lots of bunkers even though I am not a good bunker player. It's fun trying to avoid them and rewarding when I hit a good one out. I also like false fronts (as are the reactions of playing partners with either result). The thrill of sticking one past the front and the agony of rolling back to the fairway when short are a lot of fun. A fun course needn't be a dumbed down or super easy course.   I'd just as soon not have even one very long par 5, although maybe I'll rethink that based on the recent thread about par generally.


Fun is all about the shots that a course asks the player to make, (or said differently, it's about the course providing potential shot options of varying challenges and risks) and the decision making process of selecting which club to hit, where to aim, and the kind of shot the player has decided to try to execute. In making that analysis and decision for each shot, if there is an easier option and a more difficult option, and at least one of them has a reasonable chance of success (but not necessarily easy) ... that's the most significant ingredient in what makes a course fun for me. I don't mind getting beaten up by a course if it's because I chose more difficult shot options and eff'd them up. However, it's not fun to face shots that I have no reasonable chance of pulling off.
(e.g. lots of carries beyond what I can typically carry with my 4 wood)


Dogs and Castles may add something to the fun factor, but those kinds of ingredients are much less significant to me, although I really do enjoy seeing wildlife during my rounds.


One ingredient not on your list that I would support would relate to ponds and lakes that squeeze holes or front greens. I haven't thought about how I'd frame that ingredient, but do know that too much water definitely decreases the fun factor for me, although that may in some ways be inconsistent with the rest of this post

[Kalen Braley]

Anthony,

I'll come to your defense on this one.  I completely understand your point here, and I agree with all of it except one minor point which I'll get to later.

The point of this definition of fun, or fun as it was meant to be, should be based in how Michael expressed it on another thread... a numbers game.

Yes, there are a small % of golfers who find "fun" where cost is no issue, and they choose to play only the best of the best whether it be high end resorts or privates.   Or those who are very good players who enjoy the regular challenge of posting a great score on a difficult ball busting course.

And there is the rest of us, where the real numbers lie in golf, in its masses. Playing local tracks, on limited budgets, predominantly weekend play, or summer evening beer leagues, with the occasional buddy trip mixed in.  This is where fun counts the most, for the most amount of people.

P.S.  My only quibble was the original GrudgeMatch at Wine Valey.  Garland was 1 up thru 17, and we halved 18 which resulted in his narrow win, certainly not a spanking!

[Garland Bayley]

Little to no gorse even remotely in play. I.e., like Old MacDonald, not like Pacific Dunes.
I really have a good time playing Old MacDonald, but slog through Pacific Dunes. My first, and last (this last summer) I lost five balls to the gorse each time. Furthermore, most of my rounds at Pacific Dunes have been nearly five hours or more that five hours. Perhaps I am not the only one on the course suffering from lost balls. My last round at Old MacDonald was 3 hours 20 minutes. Not having to search for balls certainly helps with the pace of play there.

Old MacDonald is at the top of my fun scale. I doubt I will ever play Pacific Dunes again.

One time at Pacific Dunes I was paired with a couple from Michigan. The wife was a good golfer, the husband a high handicapper. I am sure the wife beat our best ball if we had of kept track. The husband hates Doak courses, as being too difficult. Practically his first comment to me was I hope this Doak course doesn't beat up on me like his courses back home do. He got duly beat up.

[Garland Bayley]

...
P.S.  My only quibble was the original GrudgeMatch at Wine Valey.  Garland was 1 up thru 17, and we halved 18 which resulted in his narrow win, certainly not a spanking!

My recollection was being even through 17, and I pared 18 for the win. I'll check the record.

[Garland Bayley]

...
P.S.  My only quibble was the original GrudgeMatch at Wine Valey.  Garland was 1 up thru 17, and we halved 18 which resulted in his narrow win, certainly not a spanking!

My recollection was being even through 17, and I pared 18 for the win. I'll check the record.

The younger man's memory is correct. I remember being on the fringe of 18 in 3 while Kalen was quite long over the green in junk in 3. Apparently, we each took 3 to get down. I did not par the hole.

[Garland Bayley]

...
 Not sure if not breaking a 100 is more fun than an 89.
...

I played a GCA event where I did not break 100. However, the low single digit that I was playing with commented "You clearly have more fun playing golf than I do."

[Garland Bayley]

...
Fun has become a catch-all word used to promote golf courses as somehow “better” and I think it means less and less the more we use it.

But, Anthony qualified his definition of fun with an indication of it being for average golfers. Perhaps meaning high handicappers. He specifically mentioned Kalen and me, which means he is choosing examples of golfers that only dream of being an average 16.

I am not going to check but I believe some of the old dead guys addressed the fun issue. As I recall, George Thomas wrote about designing different for public courses than for private courses so that the sometime golfer can have more fun. Alister MacKenzie wrote about not ruining the fun by setting up situations where time will be wasted looking for golf balls. A. Vernon Macan wrote about placing any water hazards when necessary in front of the tee where your ball can have a perfect lie to reduce the frustration (i.e., fun) of dealing with water hazards. Donald Ross wrote about limiting water hazards to reduce dissatisfaction. Albert Tillinghast went around the country removing cross bunkers to make golf more fun.

Whatever you do, don't classify 13 and 15 at Strandhill as "Disneyland architecture" and take away the interest (i.e., fun).

[Brad Lawrence]

I think too many people have fun synonymous with easy. There are tough courses that are fun and tough courses that are miserable. I think Bethpage is a rotten course while I think Merion is fantastic.  A chimpanzee could be taught to design tough holes. That doesn’t mean they’re any good.


I like that you added being able to change shoes in the parking lot.  The less rules, the better.  I’m 46 and I’d rather go to Chuck E. Cheese than the nicest steakhouse in town.

[Ally Mcintosh]

Good golf = good fun.


Lots of different types of good golf from Dunaverty and Cruit Island to North Berwick and Cruden Bay to Carnoustie and Muirfield.

[Pete_Pittock]

Sagebrush
Fun.
Enjoyable.
Demanding

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()