What Constitutes Slow Play?

[Buster1054]

When groups with differing numbers of players are on a course, particularly when it is crowded, it is inevitable that some players will perceive that they are held up by slow play. A single player or a twosome, and even a threesome, is most likely going to play faster than a foursome. This is at the very core of the issue. It was this way when I began playing fifty years ago, as it is now and ever will be. It has no solution short of mandating group size. As they say, it is what it is.

[mcanadiens]

10 hours ago, Buster1054 said:

When groups with differing numbers of players are on a course, particularly when it is crowded, it is inevitable that some players will perceive that they are held up by slow play. A single player or a twosome, and even a threesome, is most likely going to play faster than a foursome. This is at the very core of the issue. It was this way when I began playing fifty years ago, as it is now and ever will be. It has no solution short of mandating group size. As they say, it is what it is.

Sure, it means smaller groups are going to have to wait a bit, but anyone with any sense should know that before they get to the tee box. If it's just you and your buddy, the parking lot ought to tell you the story. 

To me, the worst is when you have a sudden pace change in the middle of the round. My old, ranger-less, starter-less, home course used to have yahoos start off the back no matter how busy the course was. Nobody was there to stop them. That 1:30 front nine gets followed by a 3:00 back nine. Kind of wondered how many of those idiots even paid to start with. That's not something that would happen at my new home course. 

Consistency is nearly as important as sheer time. With a bit of maturity, I've found that I can adjust myself to the pace if I know what to expect. 

 

Edited January 23, 2024 by mcanadiens

[jsgolfer]

18 hours ago, Ty_Webb said:

Yep - in the same way as something like 83% of people think they're above average drivers, I suspect that the number of golfers who consider themselves to be slow players is single digits as a percentage. 

One of our slowest players at my course, is convinced he is not slow at all.  No matter how many times people tell him he's turtle slow, he's oblivious.  

[klineka]

13 hours ago, Buster1054 said:

When groups with differing numbers of players are on a course, particularly when it is crowded, it is inevitable that some players will perceive that they are held up by slow play. A single player or a twosome, and even a threesome, is most likely going to play faster than a foursome. 

I don't think anyone will disagree with this.

14 hours ago, Buster1054 said:

This is at the very core of the issue. 

Group sizes less than 4 isn't the core of the slow play issue, people being selfish and unaware of or not caring about how their actions affect others is the core of the slow play issue. 

 

14 hours ago, Buster1054 said:

It was this way when I began playing fifty years ago, as it is now and ever will be. It has no solution short of mandating group size. As they say, it is what it is.

You also used persimmon woods and a different golf ball 50 years ago, right? Things can/should change and improve over time. Pace of play included.

[ChetlovesMer]

15 hours ago, Buster1054 said:

When groups with differing numbers of players are on a course, particularly when it is crowded, it is inevitable that some players will perceive that they are held up by slow play. A single player or a twosome, and even a threesome, is most likely going to play faster than a foursome. This is at the very core of the issue. It was this way when I began playing fifty years ago, as it is now and ever will be. It has no solution short of mandating group size. As they say, it is what it is.

I think they try to mandate group size when ever possible. 

My course pretty much always tries to pair folks up and build 4-somes. The times I do go out as a single I'm obviously aware that I'll be playing faster than most folks on the course. So, I'm patient and I politely ask to play through when it seems logical. 

[ChetlovesMer]

1 hour ago, klineka said:

You also used persimmon woods and a different golf ball 50 years ago, right? Things can/should change and improve over time. Pace of play included.

This is a fact. 

It's up to all of us to help. I play in a Wednesday Night golf league in which I try to help teach folks how to play quicker. I'm nice about it, I point out opportunities where things can be done to save time without affecting the enjoyment of the game. 
I'd say the biggest time savers are:

1. Using the buddy system with a cart. 
2. Keeping an eye on each other's tee shots.
3. Being efficient on the green. 
4. For God sakes pick up after you are out of the hole. 
5. If you're a person with a lot of stuff to do at your bag, do that on the next tee rather than greenside. 

Me and a couple of other guys have been working hard to gently coach up the players in our Wednesday Night League and it's actually really improved. 

A million years ago, I was coached up that I was too slow on the green. I didn't realize it, at the time, but I after I made some changes I got much faster. Now I appreciate the guy who coached me. 

A lot of people bitch about folks that play slow, but few try to help the slow players improve their pace of play. BTW - You're not helping them by screaming "Hurry up!" at them. Give them specific things they could work on to improve, in much the same way a good swing coach (I'm looking at you @iacas) gives you specific things to work on. Imagine if you went in for a lesson and your swing coach screamed "Hit it better!" at you. 

You probably can't coach the group in front of you. But you CAN coach the group your in. The next time you're paired up with some slow players, help them out. 

Also, be realistic. I talk to guys often who say "If I play with nobody in front of me I can finish in 2 hours, and 10 minutes." Okay, that's great, but that's not realistic when the course is full. 

[Buster1054]

3 hours ago, klineka said:

3 hours ago, klineka said:

You also used persimmon woods and a different golf ball 50 years ago, right? Things can/should change and improve over time. Pace of play included.

 

Yes, and I played with a Titleist balata ball and with pure blades. Par  It's my experience that players were, by and large, more skilled 50 years ago--they basically had to be to play with blades Pace of play was significantly faster.

If things can/should change and improve over time, then why is pace of play still an issue?

[DaveP043]

1 hour ago, Buster1054 said:

Yes, and I played with a Titleist balata ball and with pure blades. Par  It's my experience that players were, by and large, more skilled 50 years ago--they basically had to be to play with blades Pace of play was significantly faster.

If things can/should change and improve over time, then why is pace of play still an issue?

I'm at a similar age as you, and I have a feeling that our image of faster play in the olden days may not be really accurate.  I remember even way back then there was talk of how slow Jack Nicklaus played.  As long as I've been playing there have been faster players who had to wait on slower players ahead of them.  

[klineka]

1 hour ago, Buster1054 said:

 Pace of play was significantly faster.

Based on what facts? Can you provide sources that back up this claim? What time duration do you mean by "significantly" ?

 

1 hour ago, Buster1054 said:

If things can/should change and improve over time, then why is pace of play still an issue?

Because like I said in my prior post, pace of play is still an issue because the core issue isn't mismatched group sizes as you claimed, it's people being selfish and not caring about others around them, and in the last 50 years the general population (in the US specifically) has most likely become more selfish and even less caring of others.

[Buster1054]

1 hour ago, DaveP043 said:

I'm at a similar age as you, and I have a feeling that our image of faster play in the olden days may not be really accurate.  I remember even way back then there was talk of how slow Jack Nicklaus played.  As long as I've been playing there have been faster players who had to wait on slower players ahead of them.  

Yes, I misspoke with that sentence. In those days I mostly played on two local courses, and it was a mistake to generalize from such a small sample.

In the 70's, everyone played with blades--pure blades in my recollection--as they were all that was available. So, to play well golfers had to learn how to play these difficult irons, and ball striking would correspondingly improve. I think the current tendency to find ever more forgiving game improvement irons do not help a golfer to improve. Just the opposite, I think.

For what it's worth, in those days I could drive the green on short par 4's with a persimmon wood. Sometimes, anyway. A pinnacle in those days was a rocket.

The thing is, these courses, and their pars, are as they were fifty years ago. It's no coincidence that par remains unchanged on these courses.

[iacas]

3 hours ago, Buster1054 said:

Yes, and I played with a Titleist balata ball and with pure blades. Par  It's my experience that players were, by and large, more skilled 50 years ago--they basically had to be to play with blades Pace of play was significantly faster.

If things can/should change and improve over time, then why is pace of play still an issue?

No. Give up the glory days - players weren't really better then. They're almost surely better now — but because golf courses have gotten longer, rounds may take a little longer to play.

[Buster1054]

6 minutes ago, iacas said:

No. Give up the glory days - players weren't really better then. They're almost surely better now — but because golf courses have gotten longer, rounds may take a little longer to play.

That truly is comparing apples to oranges. Many golfers, millions probably, don't even turn in their handicap scores.

[iacas]

4 minutes ago, Buster1054 said:

That truly is comparing apples to oranges. Many golfers, millions probably, don't even turn in their handicap scores.

And yet the evidence that it gives says the opposite of what you're suggesting.

We like information, data, facts here. Not "it was better back in the good ol' days" stuff.

[Buster1054]

56 minutes ago, iacas said:

And yet the evidence that it gives says the opposite of what you're suggesting.

We like information, data, facts here. Not "it was better back in the good ol' days" stuff.

The  "evidence" you cited hardly supports your grand conclusion that scores on the world's golf courses have improved during the past thirty years. If you like information, data, and facts, then you are going to have to provide a whole lot more facts than what was provided in a magazine poll.

[klineka]

3 minutes ago, Buster1054 said:

The  "evidence" you cited hardly supports your grand conclusion that scores on the world's golf courses have improved during the past thirty years. If you like information, data, and facts, then you are going to have to provide a whole lot more facts than what was provided in a magazine poll.

I'm still waiting on the evidence from you that shows that pace of play was significantly faster 50 years ago. 

IMO, you shouldn't be commenting on someone else's evidence until you've presented your own. 

@iacas Has at least provided some facts from a reputable source (the magazines sourced the data directly from the USGA/GHIN). Even if that's not a global sample, it's still a sample size of ~5 million golfers. 

[iacas]

16 minutes ago, Buster1054 said:

The  "evidence" you cited hardly supports your grand conclusion that scores on the world's golf courses have improved during the past thirty years. If you like information, data, and facts, then you are going to have to provide a whole lot more facts than what was provided in a magazine poll.

A) Again… I've at least given info that supports the idea that golfers are better now. You are just playing the "back in my day, kiddo" card with no info beyond what you "remember" from 50 years ago.

B) This isn't the topic here.

Given B, we're all going to move on.

5 minutes ago, klineka said:

@iacas Has at least provided some facts from a reputable source (the magazines sourced the data directly from the USGA/GHIN). Even if that's not a global sample, it's still a sample size of ~5 million golfers. 

Yep.

[Maroon88]

I also see things the course does to make golfers slow:

  1.  cart path only when the course is dry

  2.  letting singles, doubles go out instead if pairing them up

  3.  zig zag cart paths by straight fairways (so you don't drive the cart too fast??)

  4.  many courses have no marshall, or just someone driving around saying "hi" to everyone

[boogielicious]

8 hours ago, Maroon88 said:

I also see things the course does to make golfers slow:

  1.  cart path only when the course is dry

  2.  letting singles, doubles go out instead if pairing them up

  3.  zig zag cart paths by straight fairways (so you don't drive the cart too fast??)

  4.  many courses have no marshall, or just someone driving around saying "hi" to everyone

These are some good points. One course I used to play had marshals. I would see them under trees taking a nap.