[Jonathan Cummings]

Here's a definition of "fun" from "Golf's Most Beloved" (paraphrasing our Ran).


"Maybe the best measure fun is after putting out on 18, to what degree do you want to go back to the first tee to play again."

[Anthony Gray]

 Maybe what I’m getting out is a Top 100 for the average guy. In normal conditions. With a couple clear cut birdie chances. Relaxed atmosphere. Memorable architecture. A few bold features. Width off the tee. Smiles. A two man select shot course where one guy can play safe and then his partner can go for it. A warm up hole 1st like TOC and easy finish like TOC. Steamed buns. Variety in par 3 lengths. 5 par 3s instead of 4.


 Again no absolutes.


 A place that doesn’t have jacket for members. Nice views. At least one hole with a water carry.


 One off the joys off golf is the bad shot into water for your playing partners. So have to have that potential.


 Again I’m talking golf course architecture and course ambiance. Golf Club Atlas stuff. Without the Al Roker stuff. Plain golf course architecture for the average Joe. At a regulation course that doesn’t include plastic gorillas or bank shots off wooden side panels on the green with multicolored golf balls and orange headed putters. Simple golf experiences under normal conditions with your hot wife or high school buddies or the guys from work. Courses that demand shot making and you can play with one sleeve of balls.


 A place for a grudge match between Garland and Kalen is around a Fun 9. Maybe a 8.37.
 
 Anthony

[Anthony Gray]

Here's a definition of "fun" from "Golf's Most Beloved" (paraphrasing our Ran).


"Maybe the best measure fun is after putting out on 18, to what degree do you want to go back to the first tee to play again."

 And what does he know? … Just joking. Exactly. A Fun scale 8-10 is like this. You return to the first tee without having to buy another dozen golf balls. Or get more alcohol because now the day is about drinking with the guts more than playing golf.


 If the average gentleman golfer can’t play the course with one sleeve of balls it’s not a Fun 8 or higher. Again no absolutes. There are times you play aggressively and risk the lost ball. We play allot of select shot which leads to more lost balls.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

Bring fun back into golf.

When was golf ever "fun" in the sense that you seem to mean it? And how is it "less" so now than 20, 30, 40 years ago?

Slow play isn't fun, but that's been an issue for decades. What else has changed? It seems from my perspective that people in the 80s or 90s cared more about the course rating and being "beat up" on the golf course, about course difficulty, and that's relaxed since then. We have more short courses (fun!) now than we did 20, 30, 40 years ago. We have more resorts and things for guys trips (even if it's almost entirely Mike Keiser).

So why do you think golf is not fun anymore and what's changed that?

I agree with others that "fun" is in the eye of the beholder. I enjoyed the heck out of my first round on Sand Valley because I grinned hard for a little over four hours. It was "fun" to shoot what I shot, but "rewarding" or "satisfying" are better words. I have "fun" when I play Oakmont and I wouldn't mind playing it every day, because worst case, I could always play it from the front tees or something if I didn't want to grind or work quite as hard on any given day.

I disagree with the premise that golf has declined in "fun." I have fun putting at Thistle Dhu for hours (for free). Or playing The Sandbox. Or just tinkering around by playing with three clubs. Or playing left-handed. Or, I don't know, just playing golf. If you don't derive your own "fun" from playing golf, why are you doing it? Nobody ever says "make recreational tennis more fun!" or "make adult soccer more fun!"

Anthony, you're in here telling us that golf isn't very "fun" for the average golfer, and so it can't possibly be "fun" for 50% of golfers that are worse than that, right?

I think you're putting too much emphasis on what YOU find fun and not considering that not only are all golfers different (many are worse than 16s), but that many 16s are different than you, too. Many 16s already find golf fun, and would disagree with huge parts of your list.

Drivable par fours aren't fun… when you double bogey them and feel like you should have made 3 or 4. And as others said, "drivable" par fours are par threes for good players as they top out at 230 yards or so. The average 16 doesn't hit it 270.

For some golfers, "fun" means getting drunk on the course. Avoiding their chores for the day. Playing with good buddies. Hitting ONE good shot. Winning some money. Shooting an all-time best score. Three-putting fewer than five times. Getting their driver in the air. Hitting the ball more solidly. Listening to some music.

So again I'll ask: what's objectively changed in the last 30 years to make golf LESS fun? Because I don't see it.

If the average gentleman golfer can’t play the course with one sleeve of balls it’s not a Fun 8 or higher.

Now you're just being ridiculous.

[Anthony Gray]

Bring fun back into golf.

When was golf ever "fun" in the sense that you seem to mean it? And how is it "less" so now than 20, 30, 40 years ago?

Slow play isn't fun, but that's been an issue for decades. What else has changed? It seems from my perspective that people in the 80s or 90s cared more about the course rating and being "beat up" on the golf course, about course difficulty, and that's relaxed since then. We have more short courses (fun!) now than we did 20, 30, 40 years ago. We have more resorts and things for guys trips (even if it's almost entirely Mike Keiser).

So why do you think golf is not fun anymore and what's changed that?

I agree with others that "fun" is in the eye of the beholder. I enjoyed the heck out of my first round on Sand Valley because I grinned hard for a little over four hours. It was "fun" to shoot what I shot, but "rewarding" or "satisfying" are better words. I have "fun" when I play Oakmont and I wouldn't mind playing it every day, because worst case, I could always play it from the front tees or something if I didn't want to grind or work quite as hard on any given day.

I disagree with the premise that golf has declined in "fun." I have fun putting at Thistle Dhu for hours (for free). Or playing The Sandbox. Or just tinkering around by playing with three clubs. Or playing left-handed. Or, I don't know, just playing golf. If you don't derive your own "fun" from playing golf, why are you doing it? Nobody ever says "make recreational tennis more fun!" or "make adult soccer more fun!"

Anthony, you're in here telling us that golf isn't very "fun" for the average golfer, and so it can't possibly be "fun" for 50% of golfers that are worse than that, right?

I think you're putting too much emphasis on what YOU find fun and not considering that not only are all golfers different (many are worse than 16s), but that many 16s are different than you, too. Many 16s already find golf fun, and would disagree with huge parts of your list.

Drivable par fours aren't fun… when you double bogey them and feel like you should have made 3 or 4. And as others said, "drivable" par fours are par threes for good players as they top out at 230 yards or so. The average 16 doesn't hit it 270.

For some golfers, "fun" means getting drunk on the course. Avoiding their chores for the day. Playing with good buddies. Hitting ONE good shot. Winning some money. Shooting an all-time best score. Three-putting fewer than five times. Getting their driver in the air. Hitting the ball more solidly. Listening to some music.

So again I'll ask: what's objectively changed in the last 30 years to make golf LESS fun? Because I don't see it.

If the average gentleman golfer can’t play the course with one sleeve of balls it’s not a Fun 8 or higher.

Now you're just being ridiculous.

 This is a forum for golf course architecture. I am trying to stick to that. And I did use the premise what is fun for the 16 handicapper.


 There are courses that beat up the guy who plays in the 90s. I think the locals in Scotland will tell you that if you are a 16 index in the US put you about a 22 and Scottland. So a course that you can’t break 100 on is not as enjoyable as a course you can shoot in the 80s. And that doesn’t take genius.


 A whole round of three puts isn’t as enjoyable.


 Certain architectural features are more enjoyable.


 I’m 57 and on the senior tees now and driving a par 4 each round is AMAZING. Can’t wait to get to those holes. Having much more fun playing those holes now as opposed to 10 years ago. Not reaching a par 4 in two because of its length not as much fun. More joy with saying “I’m putting” than with saying “came up short again, I’ll have to get up and down for par”.


 I’m not speaking for the guy that plays off scratch And has something to prove on the golf course. Par is an accomplishment for most players.


 Show me where I said golf is not fun anymore. It’s childish that you claim I have said such. In fact I enjoy it more now then when I was going around the globe trying not to miss out on something.


 Every two months I have breakfast delivered to my office and then the group goes and plays. Approaching 40 players now.  Now that’s more fun than getting the guy off the mower to carry my clubs at Cape Kidnappers.


 I’m not going out of my way to play one of these top 100 courses anymore. I’m taking a cart with my wife and baby and driving a few greens. Way more fun than a 102 at Kiawah or $600 at Sawgrass. Or chipping back and fourth at Pinehurst.


 So a top 100 Fun list would look totally diffent than a Top 100 GD if the 16 handicappers where rankers. And Derain architectUral features that I mentioned provide more fun than others.

[Sean_A]

Here's a definition of "fun" from "Golf's Most Beloved" (paraphrasing our Ran).


"Maybe the best measure fun is after putting out on 18, to what degree do you want to go back to the first tee to play again."

Doesn't work for me. I have a saturation point and to be honest 18 holes is usually beyond that point.

Ciao

[Erik J. Barzeski]

This is a forum for golf course architecture. I am trying to stick to that.

Several of the items in your first post had nothing to do with architecture.

And I did use the premise what is fun for the 16 handicapper.

You don't (can't) speak for all 16 handicappers.

There are courses that beat up the guy who plays in the 90s. I think the locals in Scotland will tell you that if you are a 16 index in the US put you about a 22 and Scottland. So a course that you can’t break 100 on is not as enjoyable as a course you can shoot in the 80s. And that doesn’t take genius.

Some of those guys shooting 100 or in the 90s will have a helluva lot more fun - on the same golf course - than some of the guys shooting in the 80s or 70s. The score you shoot is not the majority - or even often a significant part - of having "fun."

A whole round of three puts isn’t as enjoyable.

Tell that to the people playing Thistle Dhu and creating their own 40-yard putts and playing against some good buddies.

Certain architectural features are more enjoyable.

You don't speak for all in determining what's "fun." And how is a tree to aim at more "fun"?

I’m 57 and on the senior tees now and driving a par 4 each round is AMAZING. Can’t wait to get to those holes. Having much more fun playing those holes now as opposed to 10 years ago. Not reaching a par 4 in two because of its length not as much fun. More joy with saying “I’m putting” than with saying “came up short again, I’ll have to get up and down for par”.

You don't speak for all. I'm glad you know what YOU enjoy about golf, but putting your list on everyone else, that's just too much.

I’m not speaking for the guy that plays off scratch And has something to prove on the golf course. Par is an accomplishment for most players.

Fun is rarely about the score you shoot.

Show me where I said golf is not fun anymore. It’s childish that you claim I have said such. In fact I enjoy it more now then when I was going around the globe trying not to miss out on something.

It was implied to me that you were sort of saying "golf is not as much fun anymore, so here's my list of ways to make it more fun." No, you didn't literally say it. "Childish?" Oh boy.

Every two months I have breakfast delivered to my office and then the group goes and plays. Approaching 40 players now.  Now that’s more fun than getting the guy off the mower to carry my clubs at Cape Kidnappers.

To you.

I’m not going out of my way to play one of these top 100 courses anymore. I’m taking a cart with my wife and baby and driving a few greens. Way more fun than a 102 at Kiawah or $600 at Sawgrass. Or chipping back and fourth at Pinehurst.

To you.

So a top 100 Fun list would look totally diffent than a Top 100 GD if the 16 handicappers where rankers. And Derain architectUral features that I mentioned provide more fun than others.

Put 100 14-18 handicappers in a room and ask them to come up with a list of what's "fun" about golf and you're going to get 100 often very different lists.

[Anthony Gray]

This is a forum for golf course architecture. I am trying to stick to that.

Several of the items in your first post had nothing to do with architecture.

And I did use the premise what is fun for the 16 handicapper.

You don't (can't) speak for all 16 handicappers.

There are courses that beat up the guy who plays in the 90s. I think the locals in Scotland will tell you that if you are a 16 index in the US put you about a 22 and Scottland. So a course that you can’t break 100 on is not as enjoyable as a course you can shoot in the 80s. And that doesn’t take genius.

Some of those guys shooting 100 or in the 90s will have a helluva lot more fun - on the same golf course - than some of the guys shooting in the 80s or 70s. The score you shoot is not the majority - or even often a significant part - of having "fun."

A whole round of three puts isn’t as enjoyable.

Tell that to the people playing Thistle Dhu and creating their own 40-yard putts and playing against some good buddies.

Certain architectural features are more enjoyable.

You don't speak for all in determining what's "fun." And how is a tree to aim at more "fun"?

I’m 57 and on the senior tees now and driving a par 4 each round is AMAZING. Can’t wait to get to those holes. Having much more fun playing those holes now as opposed to 10 years ago. Not reaching a par 4 in two because of its length not as much fun. More joy with saying “I’m putting” than with saying “came up short again, I’ll have to get up and down for par”.

You don't speak for all. I'm glad you know what YOU enjoy about golf, but putting your list on everyone else, that's just too much.

I’m not speaking for the guy that plays off scratch And has something to prove on the golf course. Par is an accomplishment for most players.

Fun is rarely about the score you shoot.

Show me where I said golf is not fun anymore. It’s childish that you claim I have said such. In fact I enjoy it more now then when I was going around the globe trying not to miss out on something.

It was implied to me that you were sort of saying "golf is not as much fun anymore, so here's my list of ways to make it more fun." No, you didn't literally say it. "Childish?" Oh boy.

Every two months I have breakfast delivered to my office and then the group goes and plays. Approaching 40 players now.  Now that’s more fun than getting the guy off the mower to carry my clubs at Cape Kidnappers.

To you.

I’m not going out of my way to play one of these top 100 courses anymore. I’m taking a cart with my wife and baby and driving a few greens. Way more fun than a 102 at Kiawah or $600 at Sawgrass. Or chipping back and fourth at Pinehurst.

To you.

So a top 100 Fun list would look totally diffent than a Top 100 GD if the 16 handicappers where rankers. And Derain architectUral features that I mentioned provide more fun than others.

Put 100 14-18 handicappers in a room and ask them to come up with a list of what's "fun" about golf and you're going to get 100 often very different lists.

I’m not going to take the bait Erik

[Garland Bayley]

...
 If the average gentleman golfer can’t play the course with one sleeve of balls it’s not a Fun 8 or higher. Again no absolutes. There are times you play aggressively and risk the lost ball. We play allot of select shot which leads to more lost balls.

As I posted earlier, this average golfer (certainly not average by handicap, but instead by Anthony label) cannot get around Pacific Dunes with a single sleeve of golf balls. If you call hitting driver on holes with wide fairways like Pacific Dunes aggressive, then I am aggressive. I suggest Old MacDonald replace Pacific Dunes in your top fun list. My aggressive driver play at Old MacDonald doesn't lose balls for me.

[Garland Bayley]

...
Now you're just being ridiculous.

Dude,

Let me introduce you to Anthony Gray. Ridiculous is his middle name, but in a good way. Not in a bad way like others.

[Anthony Gray]

...
 If the average gentleman golfer can’t play the course with one sleeve of balls it’s not a Fun 8 or higher. Again no absolutes. There are times you play aggressively and risk the lost ball. We play allot of select shot which leads to more lost balls.

As I posted earlier, this average golfer (certainly not average by handicap, but instead by Anthony label) cannot get around Pacific Dunes with a single sleeve of golf balls. If you call hitting driver on holes with wide fairways like Pacific Dunes aggressive, then I am aggressive. I suggest Old MacDonald replace Pacific Dunes in your top fun list. My aggressive driver play at Old MacDonald doesn't lose balls for me.

 That’s definitely high on the Fun scale. Great variety. Bold features. The short Par 3. I would have to play it again. I played it with Gib so I was preoccupied with his company. Gib is a Fun 10 as a playing partner. Bill not so much.

[Ira Fishman]

The definition of fun is of course as subjective and individualistic as evaluating a course.


However, let me take a stab at some alternatives because we talk about fun quite a bit on here.


Excluding tour Professionals who try to make a living from the game, I suggest that others who choose to play in their leisure time do so because they enjoy the game.


Perhaps they enjoy the challenge of trying to play well. For those, a difficult to score well on course is fun.


Or perhaps they enjoy the diversion from the stresses of every day life. For those, a scenic course might be the definition of fun.


Or perhaps they enjoy a friendly wager with their friends. For those, a course with a few blow up holes is fun so long as there are not too many of them.


Or perhaps they are gca nerds who enjoy, well, gca.  For those, a course providing architectural distinction is fun.


Or perhaps they enjoy a day on a course that is different but not overly difficult. For those, Kilspindie is fun.


Or perhaps they enjoy some combination of all of the above. For those, NB is fun.


My point clearly is that we choose to play this game because we enjoy it more than what we could otherwise be doing with our time. I doubt any of us would then choose a course that did not meet our definition of fun.


Ira

[Anthony Gray]

The definition of fun is of course as subjective and individualistic as evaluating a course.


However, let me take a stab at some alternatives because we talk about fun quite a bit on here.


Excluding tour Professionals who try to make a living from the game, I suggest that others who choose to play in their leisure time do so because they enjoy the game.


Perhaps they enjoy the challenge of trying to play well. For those, a difficult to score well on course is fun.


Or perhaps they enjoy the diversion from the stresses of every day life. For those, a scenic course might be the definition of fun.


Or perhaps they enjoy a friendly wager with their friends. For those, a course with a few blow up holes is fun so long as there are not too many of them.


Or perhaps they are gca nerds who enjoy, well, gca.  For those, a course providing architectural distinction is fun.


Or perhaps they enjoy a day on a course that is different but not overly difficult. For those, Kilspindie is fun.


Or perhaps they enjoy some combination of all of the above. For those, NB is fun.


My point clearly is that we choose to play this game because we enjoy it more than what we could otherwise be doing with our time. I doubt any of us would then choose a course that did not meet our definition of fun.


Ira

 We’ll said Ira. What are your Top 5 funnest courses? And how did yo8 arrive at that ?

[Garland Bayley]

The definition of fun is of course as subjective and individualistic as evaluating a course.
...

And of course, there are levels of fun. Everyone can have their own version of fun, but Anthony suggests a particular subset of players, and portion of a rating system for them.

Me? I almost always have fun when playing golf. I follow the Tom Huckaby school of golfing fun. You can have fun playing on a parking lot. However, as many architects have pointed out, searching for golf balls is not fun. You can always find your ball on a parking lot. However, when you lose most of your golf balls on hand, and spend much time looking for them like at Saunton East, the fun is significantly reduced (the pro at Bude and North Cornwall gave me an "amen to that"). Therefore, parking lots rank higher than Saunton East. At least at Pacific Dunes you have spectacular scenery to look at. I recommend playing Pacific Dunes in January during good weather. The way the low angle sun lights up the ocean is spectacular.

[Anthony Gray]

The definition of fun is of course as subjective and individualistic as evaluating a course.
...

And of course, there are levels of fun. Everyone can have their own version of fun, but Anthony suggests a particular subset of players, and portion of a rating system for them.

Me? I almost always have fun when playing golf. I follow the Tom Huckaby school of golfing fun. You can have fun playing on a parking lot. However, as many architects have pointed out, searching for golf balls is not fun. You can always find your ball on a parking lot. However, when you lose most of your golf balls on hand, and spend much time looking for them like at Saunton East, the fun is significantly reduced (the pro at Bude and North Cornwall gave me an "amen to that"). Therefore, parking lots rank higher than Saunton East. At least at Pacific Dunes you have spectacular scenery to look at. I recommend playing Pacific Dunes in January during good weather. The way the low angle sun lights up the ocean is spectacular.

 Well said againGarland. If you had only one course to play the rest of your life it’s not going t0 be one where you are hunting for Easter eggs.


 The GD list includes rating elements that are not architectural related. Such as course history. So I have taken that liberty also. I have a friend that says let’s go to $#@& to play before I haven’t had their cheeseburger in awhile. That cheeseburger is fun after the round.


 That meal at The Fat Duck Inn was better after breaking 90. If I would have shot a 108 in a monsoon I would have got sauced and regurgitated the foigrais.


 

[Mark Pearce]

Any attempt to formulate rules for fun almost automatically takes all the fun away.  Anyway, fun is about shots.  It's the approach to 9 at Elie, it's the tee shot on 18 at Kington, it's any number of chips or pitches at TOC, it's the Postage Stamp, it's being in the Road Bunker, or on the road.  The best courses have a high proportion of these shots.

[Thomas Dai]

Is the fun aspect greater when there is less downtime within the game .. less waiting to play shots, less distance between greens and the next tee, less walking distance before playing the next shot etc etc?


Merry Christmas.
Atb

[Anthony Gray]

Is the fun aspect greater when there is less downtime within the game .. less waiting to play shots, less distance between greens and the next tee, less walking distance before playing the next shot etc etc?


Merry Christmas.
Atb

 Definitely. I always tried to get the first tee time. Is A six hour round at Pebble Beach for several hundred dollars as much fun as your local muni? That’s subjective.


 The walk up the hill at Cruden Bay is one of the great joys in golf.  The view is superior. Not many places on a course allow the gentleman golfer such a view of gca. The castle and sea and land are @%&#*. Ingenious design to put a hole up there and take advantage of that view and provide variety. What other course can rival that? 

[Erik J. Barzeski]

I’m not going to take the bait Erik

It would be more accurate to say that anyone responding to this topic took the bait that you offered. Not everyone experiences "fun" the way you do, or finds the same architectural things "fun," and certainly all 16 handicappers aren't the same.

Let me introduce you to Anthony Gray. Ridiculous is his middle name, but in a good way. Not in a bad way like others.

Fair enough, and Merry Christmas.

We’ll said Ira. What are your Top 5 funnest courses? And how did yo8 arrive at that ?

The course is almost irrelevant. A tiny factor in the "fun" scale for most people, I'd imagine.

You can have fun playing on a parking lot.

The fact that I'm going to agree with Garland shows you how wack the OP is.

Happy holidays everyone. May you have some "fun" with your loved ones today. 🎄

[Anthony Gray]

 [size=78%]https://www.golfdigest.com/story/most-fun-golf-courses-intro[/size]


 What the hell was this guy thinking?


 Did they ban him from contributing to Golf Digest after this article?


 Seems like “FUN” in describing and ranking golf courses is ok with Golf Digest. What do they know about golf? Do the do any other rankings?





 

[Anthony Gray]

 Oops. Golf Digest write this


 Close your eyes for a moment and imagine your ideal day of golf. The weather is sunny with a light breeze. Your partners are old friends, the kind you can count on for equal parts competition and laughter. And when your round is done, your body aches, you've gone through three sleeves of balls, four-putted, and marked "X" as your score on more than one hole.

[/size]Anything seem wrong with that picture?

[/size]Golf doesn't have to be an ordeal. Honestly, when you think back on your most enjoyable rounds, were they on courses that left you bloodied and bruised? No. They were on courses that tested but did not torment you. Challenged but did not chafe you. Made you think but did not make you think about quitting.  

[Erik J. Barzeski]

What the hell was this guy thinking?

And he listed Pebble Beach as his #1. Shadow Creek is listed because "you never know who you might see here," seemingly. Caledonia he says is fun because you can sit on the porch after the round. Etc.

I'll say it again: I think the course architecture has little to do with how much "fun" one has on a course. And not all people are going to agree on what makes for "fun" features. Like I said, some people find crazy greens and 100-foot putts to be really fun, other people would be pissed off the second or third time they had one of those.

[Ira Fishman]

Any attempt to formulate rules for fun almost automatically takes all the fun away.  Anyway, fun is about shots.  It's the approach to 9 at Elie, it's the tee shot on 18 at Kington, it's any number of chips or pitches at TOC, it's the Postage Stamp, it's being in the Road Bunker, or on the road.  The best courses have a high proportion of these shots.

Yes, as I tried to detail in my post, fun is in the eye of the beholder.


And in my eye, the first 11 holes at Elie pack as many fun shots into them as any stretch I have played. The rest are great too, but present a little too much stress for my game until number 18 which is a blast. Mark, I believe that you are a member of Elie. My fun eye is green with envy.


Ira

[Joe Hancock]

My strongest memories of having fun while playing golf seem to have these qualities in common: Spontaneous, serendipitous and unpredictable.

[Mark Pearce]

Mark, I believe that you are a member of Elie. My fun eye is green with envy.

You are, as is everyone else here, very welcome to be my guest whenever you can get to Fife.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()