[D. Kilfara]

Me, I think America needs more fascism these days. Dan, I think I'd probably trust you to play in a reasonable fashion even from the back tees, but Joe Sixpack needs positive instruction. He's the guy who wants to play from the back tees, consequences (and everyone else on the course) be damned - and NO, WE SHOULDN'T LET HIM! The flipside of personal freedom should be accountability for one's actions, but nowadays that doesn't really tend to be the case, does it? And "force them to keep pace"? How many well-disciplined corps of marshals are there at golf clubs in the States which are capable of forcing anyone to do anything? (Maybe a few - maybe.) Let's be realistic.

Are there really that many middle-handicap golfers hitting their drives 260 (on average) and taking most fairway bunkers out of play from the "member's tees"? I don't think there are, and if I'm right, this is a fringe minority which should not be catered to. If you're going to cater to them, why not cater to the Caucasian, Disabled, Super Senior Hermaphrodites along with everyone else? Let people who hit the ball wildly 260 learn how to hit the ball straight and 240 - just like Tiger, Davis Love and most sane professionals learn how to dial back their driving distances and learn the art of control. Once they do that, and lower their handicaps accordingly, then they earn the right to play on the back tees. Not before.

To be honest, a lot of people who honestly believe that they HAVE to play from the back tees to get the "full experience" from any golf course would get just as full an experience and a lot more fun if they were forced to play from the member's tees. And I do mean "forced", insofar as it takes the decision out of your hands. Because a certain (and very common, in my experience) type of guy who is allowed to play from the tips probably will do so precisely because, to paraphrase a quote I saw in another thread recently, he "didn't want to go home and have to tell the guys that he played Pinehurst No. 2 off the front tees." But if you don't give him that option, he'll still be playing from what he could truthfully call the "back" tees, which would actually be the middle tees. And he'll enjoy himself much more than he would have otherwise. It's not snobbery, I don't think, to suggest that the average American golfer needs to be educated that he's not playing the same game the professionals are - he doesn't really need to pay through the nose for the same driver, irons and golf balls with which (insert pro's name here) plays; he doesn't need to take three practice swings and read all of his putts from three sides of the hole; and he doesn't need to play from the same tees.

As for beginners, on the other hand, *on the right sort of golf course* they should have tees which facilitate their learning process and their enjoyment of the game. My wife is slowly trying to learn the game just now, and she's learning it exclusively on the Machrihanish Ladies nine at the moment - a course specifically designed for women, children, beginners, people just out to practice, or anyone who doesn't want the added intensity of a round on the "big course" for whatever reason. A wonderful concept...but then, there's really only one set of tees - not counting the Ladies' medal/competition tees, and yes, the Ladies' competition tees are *behind* the tees I play from - from which two or three carries of about 50-70 yards over long grass or, on the par-3 3rd, a burn are required. My wife hits her good shots about 80-90 yards, at least half of that being roll. A set of beginner's tees 50 yards forward on every hole would, for her (and others like her), be most welcome; instead she either has to suck it up and play from the same tees that I do, or she has to "cheat", as she tends to put it when I make the suggestion to her, and tee her ball up at the start of the fairway. Which is a shame, as I can see a portion of her enthusiasm for the game being sucked out of her every time she struggles to get through the (I kid you not) gnarly, five-inch rough right in front of the standard #5 tee. Of course, there are relatively few courses in America which actively welcome beginners, so I guess I shouldn't really complain...

Cheers,
Darren

[Steve Lang]

So,.. in terms of architecture, it sounds like three tees should be in play on any given day, while physically it may be desireable to design from 3-6 good sized grounds for both course set-up, playability, and maintenance concerns.  

If someone wants to hunt out the green tees or the black ones to play, they will... if beginners want to play from 150 yards in, they can...

[Jeremy_Glenn.]

My personnal thought is two markers.  On most holes, the two markers would be at the same spot.  Only on forced-carry hole would you move one of the markers up.

Then, design the rest of the golf hole so that it is interesting for all golfers starting from the same tee.  Think of St.Andrews.  Tiger and Mrs. Doubtfire playing from the same tee.  Tiger has hazards 300 yards away to contend with, whereas Mrs. Doubfire has something merely 150 yards away (and then deals with Tiger's bunkers on her second shot).  There is just so much going on from tee to green.

Like I said before, why have many tees and one landing area when you can have one tee and many landing areas?

[SBusch (Guest)]

Bravo, Mr. Kilfara.  You took the words out of my mouth.

Slow play is the #1 problem in our industry.  20 or 30 handicappers believing that they should play from the back tees or even white tees is a major reason for 5 hour rounds.  A 20 handicapper shouldn't be hitting the ball 250 or 300, they're swinging too hard.  They should move up, drive the ball 220, take 10 shots off their score and 30 minutes off the round.  It's a lot more fun for everyone.

[Matt_Ward]

Darren:

Let me just say this as it applies to me -- I'm a low handicap player and I DON'T HOLD PEOPLE UP. I resent when management of a facility sets-up play with tees so far forward it becomes a game of executive or short course golf. I want to play REAL golf -- not putt putt or some facsimile thereof.

The problem with many courses isn't the tees -- it's the pace of play issue and why so few facilities have meaningful corrective plans in place.

Look, I don't doubt you have a number of turkeys who think they can play from the back tees. Many of them have blue tee-itis!

If you have a competent and highly trained staff you can keep play moving and if that has staff saying to those who abuse the rear tees that they must move up -- so be it. However, don't take that away from people who wish to experience the whole course and have the wherewithal, golf wise and speed wise, to do it. Where I play from is not the central issue --how fast do I keep moving is.

[SL_Solow]

One of the best uses of multiple tees I have witnessed is a t Southen Dunes in Haines City Fla.  There is a daily game where players of all abilities pair off in teams of 2 or 4 to test their abilities.  The games are played without handicaps but players are assigned to tees commensurate with their abilities.  On a given day there may be players with some tour experience playing the back tees, 5 handicaps playing from a middle tee and high handicap players teeing off from tees usually resrved for "ladies" or "seniors".  The ball is always played down and competition is friendly and fierce.  Makes for some interesting results, especially in match play.

[D. Kilfara]

Matt - under my proposed system for America, anyone with a handicap of 6 or less will be allowed to play from the back tees. I imagine that you meet that criteria...so what's the problem? (Low-handicap Brits never, in my experience, make the complaint about "not playing the entire golf course" - which is maybe a point to address in and of itself - but the cat is out of that particular bag when it comes to American golf, hence the exemption.)

Yes, it's slow play and not playing from the back tees as such which is the real evil here. But in the absence of feasible/realistic alternatives, this would be a relatively quick-and-easy solution to a major component of the pace-of-play problem. I still think you should err on the side of being too draconian than being too lenient when it comes to who you let onto the back tees - if you're really so good that playing from middle tees makes golf feel like pitch-and-putt, Matt, how come I haven't seen your name on a Tour leaderboard recently? - but that's just me. I certainly know that it flies in the face of modern American thought, where personal freedom comes before accountability. But sometimes you have to restrict the rights of the few for the greater good of the many, don't you?

Cheers,
Darren

[Dan Kelly]

The flipside of personal freedom should be accountability for one's actions, but nowadays that doesn't really tend to be the case, does it? And "force them to keep pace"? How many well-disciplined corps of marshals are there at golf clubs in the States which are capable of forcing anyone to do anything? (Maybe a few - maybe.) Let's be realistic.

No, Darren! Let's be idealistic!

Let's not surrender, just because the battle is going poorly! Let's not look around, see that accountability "doesn't really tend to be the case," and give up the fight for accountability!

Yes: "force them to keep pace." It's entirely possible to do this (and entirely realistic to think that you could do it) -- unless, of course, you are unwilling to lose a customer once in awhile! That unwillingness is the true American vice.

You put it well when you said: "Sometimes you have to restrict the rights of the few for the greater good of the many, don't you?" But you're proposing to restrict the wrong "rights"! The "right" you need to restrict is the "right" to play golf at a glacial pace, not the "right" to play the whole golf course.

[Matt_Ward]

Darren:

Let's not confuse the issue regarding my ability as a player. I'd like to have the "choice" in deciding what tees I play from. When you make the point that you have not seen my name on a Tour leaderboard you obfuscate the issue. I hit the ball a decent ways off the tee and want to play more shots in my round than a steady diet of 5-iron off tee and then flip wedge.

Dan hit the nail on the head.

The issue is about slow play -- pure and simple. Look, if you have someone who plays well or plays poorly is irrelevant. Too many facilities TALK the game about speed of play, but fold like an envelope when confronted with it each and everyday. Usually get the combination of the young kid hanging by the pool watching the babes or the old geezer intent on finding balls in the rough to add to his shag bag collection. That's the standard profile of many rangers. On the other extreme you have the frustrated "wannabe" cop who masquerades as a ranger and is interested in hearing his voice barks out commands. In most instances in this example -- real people skills are completely absent.

How golf has been allowed in America to creep beyond 5 hour rounds is simply intolerable. I've said this before it's not the inmates who run the aslyum -- it's management. Obviously, management is intent in bleeding dollars from the wallets of players with mega size food and beverage carts that stalk the grounds as if the players must have that cold Snickers before the next tee shot. Ditto the nonsensical desire for yardage. Joe Sixpack just needs to be pointed in the direction of the green. It's absolutely comical when this type of player asks his buddies if the yardage is 163 or 167 yards! Like somehow he's going to dial in his stroke to the exact distance.

GET PLAY MOVING -- THAT'S THE BOTTOM LINE! I look it from the American perspective -- what tees I play is my business -- how fast I play is the prerogative of the management and if they need to take drastic steps so be it. But, I will not play any course where the only option is playing from extreme front tees if the other ones are clearly available and not under repair or damaged.

A few years ago on a Jersey course I saw a slow group give the ranger the bird because they were asked politely to pick up the pace. They even waved their clubs in his face. A few minutes later a squad car came onto the grounds and the whole group was pulled from the course. Management needs to get people moving ... lay the policy out, enforce it for EVERYONE and the multiple tee issue will be less of a factor.

Just an opinion from a long time dedicated publinxer.

[Mike_Cirba]

I love the way these threads diverge...

I don't think my initial thread was designed as an attempt to combat slow play, but simply to state that multiple sets of tees (more than 3, and ideally 2) are superflous, costly, unnecessary, confusing, difficult to handicap, awkward, often unsightly, distracting, and at best are based on a somewhat socialistic notion that one can create equal results by giving some a head-start.  

If, as Darren contends, play would progress quicker as well, then that's another benefit.  

[Rick Shefchik]

Although Dan wants to go back to the blue tees much more often than I do, I agree with him and Matt on this issue: it's slow play, not where you play from (whence you play? I'll leave it to Dan to clean that mess up).

This is true: My wife, a 19-handicapper, could play any course you care to name, from the blue or tournament or Only For Tiger Tees -- walking and carrying her bag -- as fast as any scratch handicapper. It wouldn't be her first choice of tees, but she'd go about her business and move along briskly, no matter how many extra shots were needed to cover the extra 1500 yards or so.

I believe the same could be said for thousands and thousands of players whose handicaps are no longer, never have been or never will be below 6. Most of them don't want to play the Tiger Tees, either, but they could do it in well under 4 hours.

Don't force people to specific tees; force them to pick up their ball and move to the next hole if they can't keep up with the group in front of them.

[RJ_Daley]

Mike, I don't mind if the course only offers 2-3 sets of tees.  It is just a question of how long that middle tee should be!

What is the advantage of saying you designed a golf course with only 2 sets of tees, one for the forward player (women and seniors of diminished distance capability) and one for traditionally thought of as memberlike or average players with the back portion of said 2nd tee for the medal player?  Or, a third small tee for said medal players is set back at an appropriate distance to challenge them?  The trouble is, that unless you design your course in the doldrums, wind must be taken into account to deal with the disparity for set up in said conditions.  That either leaves you with excessively long teeing grounds at the middle/member/average player distance, or splitting that long middle tee up to two smaller pads of teeing grounds leaving you generally 4 sets for most holes.  Now, what is the maintenance and design difference in that?  If you have two pads appropriate in SqFt size to rounds played, and can vary the sides of the avenue onto the fairway angle, why not have two pads instead of one long run-way?  Let's hear from supers what they'd rather have to deal with.  Take Wild Horse for one example.  You have to deal with the wind there.  Do you want to maintain two intermediate pads set perhaps 50 yards apart in length and probably angle variance, of about 2500-3000sqft, or a runway that covers the same distance of about 20000sqft ust because you can mow it all at once? :-/  Speed of play will be about the same.  It is about the design/play variance and need, not the speed of play.  That isn't even socialistic or capitalistic, it is pragmatic.

[D. Kilfara]

Matt - I'm mostly just giving you a hard time. No hard feelings, I trust.

That said...if your conception of "middle tees" means that from them you'd be enduring "a steady diet of 5-iron off tee and then flip wedge", how bloody far do you hit the ball? I don't think the middle tees are an average of 100 yards ahead of the back tees on any given hole, which is what you seem to be implying.

I still don't fully buy the argument about "playing the entire golf course". Every time you play a given hole, you usually only "play" on tiny segments of the hole - the spot your drive landed, the spot your second shot landed, and so on. "Playing the entire golf course" is, I believe, actually code for "facing the same hazards that (insert pro's name here) would if he was playing from the tips." Let me give you a stereotypical hole...a par 4, 430 from the tips, 400 from the middle tee. From the tips, a 250-yard carry with the driver might land in one of two fairway bunkers flanking the ideal landing area; from the middle tees, the carry (presuming that you hit your drive well enough to carry 250) doesn't have to worry about bunkers but does have a slightly narrower fairway to contend with. If you, the long hitter, play from the middle tee, you still have troubles to worry about - they just aren't the same troubles that the pro sees. By the same token, whether I (and my 210-yard carry off the tee, if I'm lucky) play the course from the middle or the back tees, I'm also not going to face the same trouble that the pro does, because I'm not long enough to reach it. I'll have my own troubles to contend with. And believe me, a steady diet of driver + long iron approach is a lot harder to live with than the 5-iron + flip wedge diet to which you refer (and yours is theoretical, whereas mine is a day-to-day reality).

But you know what? I play from the tees I'm asked to play at, and I deal with it. Which, incidentally, is exactly what every British golfer I've ever known does, even the very best of them. Nobody complains about being too long for a given golf course - they just go out and try to shoot the best score that they can. Honestly, if you really think that playing from the middle tees makes the game too boring for you, I'm sure you can find some ladies' golf balls or a persimmon driver to play with that will allow you to have your cake and eat it ,too.
There are *always* ways to hit the ball shorter; for those of us not blessed with the muscles and/or swing technique to hit the ball a long way, there isn't much we can do (in the present tense) to hit the ball longer.

As to the slow play argument - well, of course there are other ways to speed up play than force people to play from forward tees. Of course, other golfers will find those other remedies just as unacceptable as some of you find this one, which is in part why American golf is in the state it's in. Color me cynical! I'm merely suggesting that this is one way of doing it which might be easier to enforce than many others. Yes, slow play is a terrible disease. But are you willing enough to make a sacrifice of your own to help combat it? (FWIW, I have - I used to take two full practice swings before every shot I hit, now my pre-shot routine is down to one semi-waggle and a quick look at my line from behind the ball.)

Mike - sorry if your initial thread has been hijacked. It happens. I agree with all of your other sentiments about multiple tees as well, as it happens. The really awful thing in my mind is trying to squeeze the scorecard from one of these courses with six sets of tees in your back pocket - it won't fit, because in having to display six sets of yardages on the card they have to blow it up 150 or 200 percent! And to have six sets of tees you have to have six different colors, which is another pet peeve - it used to be that you had red tees up front, white tees in the middle, blue tees in the back and possibly a yellow/gold set of championship tees, but now I see any number of courses with tee designations well removed from primary colors or, worse, tees not named after colors at all, so that you have to remember that you're playing from the "Nicklaus" tees or the "Shakespeare" tees or who-knows-what-else. Yuck.

Cheers,
Darren

[RJ_Daley]

Geez Louise,

"Socialized" programs are command and control and restricted and regulated affairs.  Socialized golf relative to tees, is the lack of choice. You are dictated within a narrow range of choices.  Do you play white or white if you are in the range of a 8 to 20 handicapper.  Pretty soon you'se will be telling us we have to wear a certain plaid kilt.

And, what about the notion of promoting interesting and functional golf course architecture?  Look at the new or young guns in the business that this site seems to be fond of praising.  How many of them are building 2 teeing grounds courses on long par 4s or 5s.  How many hidden tees do they have at Pac Dunes?  (I don't know-never been there).  Look at Kingsley Club.  I think there are up to 8 sets of tees on some of his big concept holes.  And, they are a good thing.  You can present very different holes with widely varying strategies.  Take his opening par 5 with a big middle rough and bunker island and two very distictively different fairways, high and low.  If he had one set of tees playing to all that design, it would be boring and on some particular wind days, it would not make good sense.  But for the members, thanks to multiple tees, they have a great hole that they can play in a multitude of strategies and conditions.  The same holds true for his #9 hole, par 3 that literally plays from two different directions.  Tobacco Road is another multiple tee course that allows the owners to set it up to give you different looks and feel on different days.  Isn't a golf course even more fun when it can be presented vastly different due multiple tees to varying sides or angles of attack?  Are you telling me that if I am not so powerful of a player (older chap) and I decide to play our match (you being a 6-10 handi and long and I being a 15) that I am going to be slower than you if I go off of the 6300-6600yard "gentleman's tees" and you go at 6700-7000 "Gorilla tees"?  Come on

[Steve Lang]

Funny how almost any design related thread on GCA gets around to slow play!  Perhaps courses should be designed like David Ogrin's High Meadow Ranch near Magnolia, TX with 3-6 hole loops and players only be allowed to play golf on a time-share basis... or given a rebate if they do play fast!

A couple of summers ago we played at beautiful Bay Harbor on the shoreline of Lake Michigan and the starter engaged us to slyly determine what we could shoot, where we played, etc..  He then advised us all to play a forward set of tees in order to keep pace, because of two of the foursome, and we obliged.  After about three holes when we found ourselves waiting on every hole for almost every shot, we all moved back one tee, split the group and played team hi-lo.  We still had to wait on the group ahead, even with spending time with the beverage cart lady.

I don't think its the tees. I don't think socialist golf is for Americans. I don't think marshalls or their neuterred cousin "player-hosts" have any real power (except perhaps in NJ!).  I think its the game.  Its inherently slow, no matter what you do and can be really slow if there's any thinking required or conducted.  To be able to twitch sets of muscles for maybe 10-15 minutes over 4 hours is sort of a diabolical game. Give me a drink please.

My wife & I walked 18 tonight in 3 hours, match play, I won the front 2 & 0, halved the back, held off a press for the 18 hole match.  We've played all of our courses in 3 hours or less when walking and the course was open.  We see 4-4.5 hour rounds as death marches in the summer, bearable in fall/winter/spring.  If it looks like its going to be 5 hours, we walk off at 9.

[D. Kilfara]

RJ/Dave, did you guys even read the thread? (I feel like I'm banging my head into a brick wall, here!) RJ, nobody has suggested that multiple *teeing grounds* is a bad thing - quite the contrary. Multiple sets of *tees* is what we're complaining about. It should be possible to put the white tees in any of three or four different places and give you a different choice of strategic options on any given day. And you've accidentally stumbled upon one reason that multiple tees = slow play: if one of you plays from the 6700-yard tees and one of you plays from the 6300-yard tees, that will automatically lead to slower play than if both of you were playing from the 6700-yard tees, because there's a natural pause every time your group reaches a new teeing area.

Dave, yes, slow play is the important issue here. But like I've said every time I've opened my mouth in this thread, forcing people onto forward tees would lead to faster play for most American golfers. Sub-4:00 rounds are the exception, not the norm, and one quick-and-easy way of redressing that situation is to force lesser golfers forward; also, by more or less ensuring that all men are playing from the same tees, you speed things up further by clustering everyone together at the start of each hole. Yes, there are other solutions, but this is one which will almost definitely work and which seems terrifically easy to implement, unlike most others.

"Socialism" is maybe the wrong word Mike chose to use, but he's got a good point. It's similar to the situation in American education at the moment, where everyone falls over backwards to ensure that the dumber kids are made to feel "special", often by slowing up the learning process so much that the bright kids - the ones who in my humble opinion should be catered for - are held back so as not to embarass anyone and are even made to feel that blending in with their peers is more important than standing out as an academic star. Of course, Mike's initial point seems to be that all of these 10-28 handicappers playing from forward tees should be pushed back slightly to a uniform set of "member's tees", which would actually lead to slightly slower play...but we'll forgive him for that, right?

Cheers,
Darren

[Jim_Kennedy]

Mike,
Steve Lang's observation (reply #30) pretty well sums up my feeling on this issue.

As to slow play/wrong tee, the real culprit is the way many people approach golf. For them it is recreation and that translates as leisure time. There is no benefit to playing at a good pace when one feels this way, it(leisure time) would be over too soon.
The core golfers at our course choose to stay away when the "recreational golfers" are here. They can opt for this approach because we are not located in an overpopulated area.

[TEPaul]

Rich Goodale:

Be very careful when you use the term "fellow travelers" to describe people! That's going far beyond even the best of Socialism (or the worst of it)!

Even Herb Filbrick would have never used a term like that in the context of everyday socialism and today one of those New York limosine liberals just might throw a glass of expensive white wine in your face if you called him a "fellow traveler"!

[RJ_Daley]

Some courses just aren't made to be played in 3-3.5 hours.  I know of one pretty good one in the middle of nowhere that has a pretty high reputation that only has basically 2 sets of tees and in some places three, where you would have to be marathon man to get around in less than 4hours.  And, why would you want to go around there in 3 hours, other than to play as many holes as you can in a day? There is something to be said for enoying the walk, even if it adds 45minutes to an hour...  my opinion, I could be wrong.

[D. Kilfara]

There isn't a single golf course in the world (excepting "cartball" courses with hideously long walks from green to tee) which a foursome can't comfortably play in less than four hours, no matter how badly its members are playing, if everyone in that foursome is aware of his surroundings and knows what he's doing. Accent on the word "comfortably".

That's my opinion. I could be wrong.  

Cheers,
Darren

[Tom Doak]

RJ:  I'm going to disagree with you about multiple tees.  I'll use two examples:  the first at Kingsley Club (your example) and the 15th at Pacific Dunes (probably the most tees I've ever built).

There are basically two ways to play the first at Kingsley -- try to hit it up top to the right (or over the top), or play safe down to the left (and probably not see where you're going for your second shot).  I would guess that all of those tees are there so that all players are given either option, "if they play the right tee."  Most designers use all these multiple tees because they fall in love with how a hole COULD play, and they want everyone to have the same experience.

That's not what old courses are like.  On the first at Crystal Downs, there's one tee -- if the wind's at your back you may be able to get there in two, if it's in your face it's probably a three shotter.  It works well either way.  The first at Kingsley really doesn't -- if you're playing a tee where you can't hit it to the upper fairway, it's not much fun of a golf hole.

(I'm not trying to pick on Mike here.  His ninth hole at Kingsley is a great example of using multiple tees to give more variety to a hole.)  

Now, the 15th at Pacific Dunes.  There are a lot of optional tees there.  It's as long as 560 yards, as short as 440.  There are a couple of tees hidden in the dunes to the right, which present a spectacular view, a dogleg complication, and a forced carry over the gorse.  Many people may think I built this variety so the hole could always be set up to be borderline reachable in two, but in fact that's not why I did it; I built all of those tees because the hole has more variety that way.

When a golf hole really needs a lot of different tees in order for it to work, I would say it's less than ideal.

[Doug Siebert]

of course, Darren, we could all play 18 holes in 2 1/2 hours if par 5's were 410, par 4's were 270, etc.  But that's called the "Ladie's Tees". I for one don't want to play from there. So, yes, we could speed play by forcing everybody up a set or two of tees.  The question is whether that's the right thing to do.  

I don't know that it'd be that much faster with such short holes.  Things can move awfully slow on a course with a lot of driveable par 4s.  That group of 25 handicappers almost certainly won't drive the green on a 270 yard par 4, but it is quite likely one or more of them is capable of doing it with a perfect shot, and therefore they need to wait for the green to clear.  If you have a lot of holes where only one group can be playing the hole at once its going to really slow things down.  Even if it takes less time by the wristwatch, I can't take playing very many holes where I walk up to a tee and find one or more groups stacked up waiting for the green to clear.  I'd rather play a 5 hour round where I had to wait a couple minutes before each tee shot and approach instead of a 3 1/2 hour round where I had a few 10-15 minute waits at choke points but otherwise played at my own pace.  That just totally destroys my rhythm.

I have never believed that people playing from the back tees when they don't have the skill to do so is a primary cause of slow play.  If a group is slicing their drives in the rough it won't take much that much longer from 7000 yards than from 6400.  Bad players tend to waste most of their time around and on the greens, because they have poor short games and will do things like skulling sand shots over the green into another sand trap, putting off the green on courses with quick greens they aren't used to, etc.  Even if they aren't imitating the slowness around the greens many PGA players demonstrate on a weekly basis they still take a long time, because they are hitting twice as many shots around the greens than better players, and more putts as well.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()