How to design a "fair" and fun Golf course

[onthehunt526]

I have a great idea.

First, I've noticed a lot of golf courses I've played, have too many holes the same length... I've played courses where I've played 4 par-3s and hit the same club to all of them....

I've played courses where 6 or 7 of the par-4s I've had the same two clubs for second shots in to them...

And I've played courses where I can reach all the par-5s or reach none of them...

Here is my idea... I would want to test a golfer's entire bag through the round... Not just a few clubs, so a variety pack (believe it or not from the Championship Tees, you could get a 7,200 yard course doing this)

Let me show you what I mean:

Par 3s- A short par-3 where you'd hit a short iron or wedge to, A short-medium, A long-medium, and a just plain long... For example if we based this on my distances from let's say the Blues... 130, 160, 190, 220 the numbers aren't exact, but I'm just throwing numbers in there.

Par 4s: Same sort of concept, maybe one that's possibly driveable, one you might drive with your best. A drive and pitch, drive short iron (2), drive medium iron (3), drive and long iron or Hybrid (1), and one really long par 4 you may need a fairway/hybrid/long iron to.

So modest distances for these holes for me would be 280, 305, 325, 350, 370, 385, 400, 410, 440, 470 (longer from Championship Tees)

Par-5s: This is simple: One almost everyone can reach in two, One that two good shots will reach, One that two great shots will reach but is typically a 3 shot Hole, and a pure three-shot Hole and we're talking Driver, 3-wood and at least a full swing motion wedge...

So yardages for these based on my distances would be 480, 520, 550, 590... 

So my par-threes average 175 yards

Par 4s average 378.5 yards

Par 5s average 535 yards

My total for my distances would be 6625 yards a good blue/green tee course, but you could mess around with the numbers for TOUR Pros or better amateurs and have a course that is 700-900 yards longer with out messing with the basic concept... 

What does the Sand Trap Universe think? Would a course that test's your entire bag be more fun to play? This concept is based on distance but there would be some trouble around, bunkers, OB, water hazards, Etc.

Any suggestions would be welcomed... If you think I'm a basket case that's OK too, but it's just an idea.

 

[SavvySwede]

I like the idea only issue being how to get those holes to "play" to those yardages. Short to medium par 4's need some sort of defense against tee shots to keep them from becoming push overs and occasionally encourage using less than driver off the tee. You need to factor in elevation and prevailing winds as well. Two courses by me, Mercer Oaks East and West do a pretty good job of it.

[onthehunt526]

I've factored in the hazards @SavvySwede, the prevailing winds, not so much yet... But effective playing distance is the goal with all of the holes.

[inthecup]

I think a lot of the course is dictated by the land it is put on.   The routing can be the most difficult part.  When you get that done you have to work with what you have.   But what do I know. 

[newtogolf]

What level of golfer are you designing the course to be fun and fair for?  The challenge I see with golf course design is you have to have a target player in mind and as @inthecup stated, the land you have to work with.  Holes designed using your distances would play completely different for those who hit longer and shorter.

 

[DaveP043]

2 hours ago, inthecup said:

I think a lot of the course is dictated by the land it is put on.   The routing can be the most difficult part.  When you get that done you have to work with what you have.   But what do I know. 

This was my first reaction as well.  If you have a nice level site, you can do pretty much what you want to, with bulldozers and excavators.  If there's terrain to consider, creeks, lakes and ponds, the best architects will find a routing that produces the best set of holes and flow of golfers, regardless of the kind of "artificial" constraints you're considering.  My preference is to play courses that fit the land that they're built on, rather than courses where lots of dirt has been moved to create something, as spectacular as they might look.

[saevel25]

It's not all about yardage. You can effectively lengthen or shorten a hole by adding hazards or doglegs. 

I really never think about it much. I've played the same course twice. One day I had 9 iron for an approach 5 holes in a row. The next time it was completely different. 

Even the best laid plans don't turn out the way you want. 

[newtogolf]

4 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

It's not all about yardage. You can effectively lengthen or shorten a hole by adding hazards or doglegs.

I really never think about it much. I've played the same course twice. One day I had 9 iron for an approach 5 holes in a row. The next time it was completely different.

Even the best laid plans don't turn out the way you want.

Agree but the hazards and doglegs are usually placed assuming some expected distance off the tee.   If the course is designed properly and the hazards and doglegs are placed with consideration of the different tee boxes, you can definitely impact how the hole plays. 

I've played some courses where the fairway hazards almost never came into play for me and I've played others where I was had to be concerned about what club I used off the tee to avoid them.

[natureboy]

I think one way to approach the gradient of pros to higher HCPs is tohave a decent number of tee boxes - maybe about 1 per 10 strokes for a total of about 5 or 6. They would be sized according to expected course population or the national HCP distribution so more expected golfers of a certain HCP range would yield a larger teeing ground.

The good players are generally very good with driver so you can limit their approach by putting them in longer, tighter chutes with tall trees limiting their ability to hit over or around the intended line of play potentially forcing them to club down to hit the landing are or risk going through. Without trees, I guess the same could be accomplished by necking down the fairways in the expected landing areas. Tee box alignments would also skew more to the outside of the dogleg for better players while higher HCPs would have a straighter shot past the doglegs. Par 3's would have greater portions of water or waste areas for low HCPs to carry while higher HCPs would have a safer direct route and more bail option.

I see lots of these ideas already on many top level courses with perhaps not so many tee boxes to accommodate the really high HCPs / beginners.

Edited December 5, 2015 by natureboy

[ev780]

 I like the way the OP thinks except for long par 3's.  The average 12 handicapper has no business playing a 220 par 3.  I would add that make the Par 3's versatile if it is a membership based course where a significant number of players are playing the course a lot. That way a Par 3 can be a hybrid one day and a 9 iron the next.  I guess that could apply to the par 5's too. Driveable one day and full three shots the next.  All those things probably wreak havoc with the course rating but who cares.

Don't over bunker.  At my Country Club course every damn green has bunkers. Use collection areas, run ups, grass pits,water if available just to add variety.

 

[onthehunt526]

Like I said, in my first post, I understand that there are hazards and OB and bunkers to consider... The par-4s would be hardest to use this template on... You can make a course challenging, but also fun to play and fair to all golfers..  And you don't need 4 500-yard par 4s to be challenging. There is also the no par scorecard idea, but that's off topic

[jamo]

7 hours ago, newtogolf said:

What level of golfer are you designing the course to be fun and fair for?  The challenge I see with golf course design is you have to have a target player in mind and as @inthecup stated, the land you have to work with.  Holes designed using your distances would play completely different for those who hit longer and shorter.

 

And herein lies the challenge. If you want to design a 240-yard par 3 to test the long irons of better players, you have to really shorten it up for players who can't hit it that far. And to make a 100-yard par 3 tough for better players, you need aggressive bunkering or water, and a sloping green, so you're really screwing players who aren't as good.

[onthehunt526]

56 minutes ago, jamo said:

And herein lies the challenge. If you want to design a 240-yard par 3 to test the long irons of better players, you have to really shorten it up for players who can't hit it that far. And to make a 100-yard par 3 tough for better players, you need aggressive bunkering or water, and a sloping green, so you're really screwing players who aren't as good.

I'll agree on the 240-yard par 3 having the hole be shorter for players who don't hit it as far, that's what extra tee markers are for... So 240 from the tips would be like 215-220 from the tournament Tees, 195 from the regular Tees, 170 from the Senior Tees, 145-150 from the Ladies Tees and 70 yards from the Alina Tees (Alina is my 2 year old daughter in case you wondered)... As for making 100 yard par-3 difficult, you don't need very aggressive bunkering, you just need a sloped green and a few strategic hazards... And maybe a collection area...

 

As for my target golfer, Would be all golfers, Challenging enough for better players, but fun enough for average golfers... You can always change the angle the better player's have to play the hole at, compared to the average golfer, for instance if you play my 220 yard par 3 from the Blues (which is what all my yardages are based on, it would be like 240 from the tips)... I could maybe alter the angle from the tips and make a bunker come more into play from there, and basically be out of play from the white tees forward... Collection areas are fun, I'd definitely have some of those. 

Edited December 5, 2015 by onthehunt526
Had an additional point

[WUTiger]

The whole idea of target player is critical. As per @jamo, it's rough to design a course "for all players."

At my home course, I have my most trouble with some of the shorter holes. A 140-yd. par 3 has a green which angles from left to right, and has two deep bunkers short right and one long left, with OB left and right.  If you miss the green it's probably a double bogie.

On No. 16, the narrow 300-yd. par 4 runs through a valley with OB left and hazard right. You're hitting into a funnel on the fairway. The green has angled shoulders, and anything that doesn't land directly on the green caroms into the bunkers. Lots of double bogies if you miss the fairway, or the green. I'm more likely to get a par on No.14, a 400-yd. uphill par 4, than on No. 16.

In the Midwest, a number of the classic courses were designed by the Foulis brothers from St. Andrew's, Scotland. The Foulis family worked with Old Tom Morris, One of the brothers (I believe it was James), strove for balance in his routings. He advocated six hard, six moderate and six easy holes for every 18. If you look at the scorecards of two his St. Louis area tracks, Normandie Golf Club and Glen Echo Country Club, you will see a wide variety of yardages which @onthehunt526 would find quite pleasing.

[bkuehn1952]

Most modern golf course architects probably start with your concept.  Sometimes the land and terrain allow it to occur. 

With most golfers hitting accurate 280+ yards drives, it becomes a challenge to make any course interesting enough when every par 4 under 450 is driver/wedge. 

[SavvySwede]

10 minutes ago, bkuehn1952 said:

Most modern golf course architects probably start with your concept.  Sometimes the land and terrain allow it to occur. 

With most golfers hitting accurate 280+ yards drives, it becomes a challenge to make any course interesting enough when every par 4 under 450 is driver/wedge. 

Where do you play?

[collapse]

25 minutes ago, bkuehn1952 said:

Most modern golf course architects probably start with your concept.  Sometimes the land and terrain allow it to occur. 

With most golfers hitting accurate 280+ yards drives, it becomes a challenge to make any course interesting enough when every par 4 under 450 is driver/wedge. 

I think the PGA tour average is about 280....the average recreational golfer is probably under 240.

[bkuehn1952]

5 hours ago, SavvySwede said:

Where do you play?

I based this on what everyone reports online.