Are Golf Courses Too Long and Difficult? Lee Trevino Interview

[Paradox]

well in an ideal world, the "trouble" would be placed at a position where everyone could reach when playing from the appropriate tees..

and how many courses are built for no one other than everyday amateurs or competing amateurs?  Most of this group can not hit drives that CARRY 300 yards..so the trouble can be put at 275-280 off the back tees...that would put the carry from(using my home course) the next tees up at around 245/250-265..and then on down the line...THATS good course design.  The idea of different tees is that different hitters can play their approach from the same area.

[Jooma]

Lee is so right. A 90% of the weekend golfers cannot break 100 playing from the ladies tees on a 5000 yards long golf course. What difference does it make if the winning score is 35 under? Only egos of the competition organisers may suffer – so what?

[lumpuckeroo]

I would agree with Lee, especially the part of men being macho and not want to be pushed forward.  Perfect example, I played a couple of weeks ago with my dad and another gentleman that was probably in his 60's, my dad turns 80 this year.  The course we played is not very long 6000 yard from the blue tees, which are the "back" tees.  We have all played the course a lot, the other gentleman marshalls there, I went to the "back" tees, both my dad and he were like, "Well I guess we can play the back tees!".  I know if those tees would have been the "middle" tees they would not have thought twice about them, because my father was willing to play the "middle" tees at 6200 yards the day before, but I actually moved him up.

I really have no issues playing from a distance that works for me, I've been telling my brother for years, I have no intention of having to hit driver, 3 wood to all par 4's, I'm not that proud to move forward.

[bunkerputt]

You simply can't argue that building golf courses for 0.01% of players is a dumb idea.  Lee's brilliant as usual and is saying what we're all thinking.  BTW, I didn't vote because the poll is simply something that can be measured, so opinion is fairly useless here.

[MEfree]

Originally Posted by Paradox

well in an ideal world, the "trouble" would be placed at a position where everyone could reach when playing from the appropriate tees..

and how many courses are built for no one other than everyday amateurs or competing amateurs?  Most of this group can not hit drives that CARRY 300 yards..so the trouble can be put at 275-280 off the back tees...that would put the carry from(using my home course) the next tees up at around 245/250-265..and then on down the line...THATS good course design.  The idea of different tees is that different hitters can play their approach from the same area.

I don`t agree with this.  Let`s say a foursome consists of a guy who hits it 250 (total carry and roll), another who hits it 265, another who hits it 280 (assume 265 carry and 15 roll) and another who carries it 290.  If the "trouble" is always the same distance and they play the back tees in your example, the 280 hitter seems to get penalized relative to the other 3.  If they play the next tees up, then the longer two can fly the trouble while the shorter two are always dealing with it.  I could come up with a similar example involving a group of shorter hitters playing the middle tees.

With your proposal, the "trouble" could be taken out of play for a particular length hitters if there is some sort of technological break though that adds distance.  This is how some courses become obsolete (in terms of being a fair challenge to a wide range of players).

I think it is better to mix up the distance of the "trouble"- add (or take away) 20 yards of distance off the tee and it becomes easier to fly (or stay short) of the "trouble" on some holes while on other holes the trouble is moved into play (for a regular distance tee shot).  Having "trouble" extend for a longer distance on the same hole is another way to make sure that all length hitters have to deal with their fair share of "trouble"

[sean_miller]

Originally Posted by MEfree

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paradox

well in an ideal world, the "trouble" would be placed at a position where everyone could reach when playing from the appropriate tees..

and how many courses are built for no one other than everyday amateurs or competing amateurs?  Most of this group can not hit drives that CARRY 300 yards..so the trouble can be put at 275-280 off the back tees...that would put the carry from(using my home course) the next tees up at around 245/250-265..and then on down the line...THATS good course design.  The idea of different tees is that different hitters can play their approach from the same area.

I don`t agree with this.  Let`s say a foursome consists of a guy who hits it 250 (total carry and roll), another who hits it 265, another who hits it 280 (assume 265 carry and 15 roll) and another who carries it 290.  If the "trouble" is always the same distance and they play the back tees in your example, the 280 hitter seems to get penalized relative to the other 3.  If they play the next tees up, then the longer two can fly the trouble while the shorter two are always dealing with it.  I could come up with a similar example involving a group of shorter hitters playing the middle tees.

With your proposal, the "trouble" could be taken out of play for a particular length hitters if there is some sort of technological break though that adds distance.  This is how some courses become obsolete (in terms of being a fair challenge to a wide range of players).

I think it is better to mix up the distance of the "trouble"- add (or take away) 20 yards of distance off the tee and it becomes easier to fly (or stay short) of the "trouble" on some holes while on other holes the trouble is moved into play (for a regular distance tee shot).  Having "trouble" extend for a longer distance on the same hole is another way to make sure that all length hitters have to deal with their fair share of "trouble"

Not sure I follow every train of logic people have about course design, but I like the idea of setting a cours up where longer players can carry some hazards and end up with a safer tee shot. Why not reward people who have mastered that part of the game? Do I get to putt to a different hole with less break because I'm not so good with the flat stick? No, I need to practice with a purpose and get better at putting.

[Mr3Wiggle]

I've played a few Pete Dye courses and also a course designed by his kid P.B.  IMO the course designs really only work if played from the tips (blacks).  Playing them from the white, blue, or gold tees makes the course feel awkward.  I guess Pete and his son envision every course they design being a PGA Tour stop someday.  Makes no sense to me why their courses are so popular with the masses.

[sean_miller]

Originally Posted by Mr3Wiggle

I've played a few Pete Dye courses and also a course designed by his kid P.B.  IMO the course designs really only work if played from the tips (blacks).  Playing them from the white, blue, or gold tees makes the course feel awkward.  I guess Pete and his son envision every course they design being a PGA Tour stop someday.  Makes no sense to me why their courses are so popular with the masses.

Used to play a course called "Goose Hummock" (~ 35 minutes north of Edmonton AB).

From the tips it's way easier. You can work the ball and distance control off the tee isn't so critical. From the shorter tees, the 1st shots are all harder. Less club but less room for error. On a couple par 5s you're tempted to "go for it" from the forward tees, but then keeping the ball out of the next set of hazards is pure luck. From the forward tees the course is a bunch of layups and lost balls.

[Mr3Wiggle]

Originally Posted by sean_miller

Used to play a course called "Goose Hummock" (~ 35 minutes north of Edmonton AB).

From the tips it's way easier. You can work the ball and distance control off the tee isn't so critical. From the shorter tees, the 1st shots are all harder. Less club but less room for error. On a couple par 5s you're tempted to "go for it" from the forward tees, but then keeping the ball out of the next set of hazards is pure luck. From the forward tees the course is a bunch of layups and lost balls.

Yeah, that's how P.B Dye Golf Club (Ijiamsville, MD) plays from the forward tees.  Some of the doglegs are too severe to be shortened so much.

[Alan Conroy]

Originally Posted by jamo

I agree with Lee. I usually play the back or second-to-back tees, but when I play with friends (a few times a year), we always move forward. Mostly because they're absolutely terrible , but partly because it's just really, really fun.

About a year and a half ago we did a forward tees challenge here at TST, and it was a load of fun. I shot a -5.

Can I have your autograph... please?

[zipazoid]

Problem is, oftentimes members want their track to be Pine Valley or Oakmont. So they'll get a name archtiect to design a penal colony disguised as a golf course. Presumably in hopes of attracting a large event or whatever. Meanwhile, they go out & shoot 110 and claim they're having fun.

Whatever.

[Paradox]

Originally Posted by MEfree

I don`t agree with this.  Let`s say a foursome consists of a guy who hits it 250 (total carry and roll), another who hits it 265, another who hits it 280 (assume 265 carry and 15 roll) and another who carries it 290.  If the "trouble" is always the same distance and they play the back tees in your example, the 280 hitter seems to get penalized relative to the other 3.  If they play the next tees up, then the longer two can fly the trouble while the shorter two are always dealing with it.  I could come up with a similar example involving a group of shorter hitters playing the middle tees.

With your proposal, the "trouble" could be taken out of play for a particular length hitters if there is some sort of technological break though that adds distance.  This is how some courses become obsolete (in terms of being a fair challenge to a wide range of players).

I think it is better to mix up the distance of the "trouble"- add (or take away) 20 yards of distance off the tee and it becomes easier to fly (or stay short) of the "trouble" on some holes while on other holes the trouble is moved into play (for a regular distance tee shot).  Having "trouble" extend for a longer distance on the same hole is another way to make sure that all length hitters have to deal with their fair share of "trouble"

well, you're back to the same problem as before..people playing the wrong set of tees for their distance.  On top of that, you're just assuming that the design aspects will somehow stop abruptly and not cover enough yardage that it will serve for a range of different length hitters. Just because I said the trouble would be at 280 doesn't mean it will end at 280..it could span out to 295 if you so desire...  Courses don't become obsolete due to technology..they become obsolete because their design wasn't well thought out to begin with.  Usually they are simple with too many similar holes and not much trouble.

[MEfree]

Originally Posted by Paradox

well, you're back to the same problem as before..people playing the wrong set of tees for their distance.  On top of that, you're just assuming that the design aspects will somehow stop abruptly and not cover enough yardage that it will serve for a range of different length hitters. Just because I said the trouble would be at 280 doesn't mean it will end at 280..it could span out to 295 if you so desire...  Courses don't become obsolete due to technology..they become obsolete because their design wasn't well thought out to begin with.  Usually they are simple with too many similar holes and not much trouble.

I didn`t assume that trouble just stops and agree that the longer it runs for the more fair it is to all players.

"Wrong Tees"  I like the idea of multiple tee boxes and people playing the "appropriate" tees but this isn`t always realistic.  What if the example I gave was a foursome of sub 5 h`cappers playing in the Club Championship.  Should they each play different tees according to how long they hit it?  If they play the same tees, why should the course be set up as to only penalize a certain length tee shot?

"Similar Holes"  In my mind, one way to ensure that there are not too many similar holes is to have trouble at different distances off the tee on different holes.  Having trouble that is always 275-280 off the back tee, etc only seems to make the holes play more similar to each other (at least for the tee shots) even if they look different.  Some holes should reward a guy who can carry it 280 while other holes may be designed to encourage him to lay up if he doesn`t feel confident about hitting it straight.

[johnclayton1982]

It hasn't been my experience that moving the tees really changes score all that much.  I mean, typically, when I see someone shoot over 100 they wouldn't improve their score very much shooting from the next set up of tees.  Its typically a combination of fat shots, OB tee shots, and bad short game leaves.  Its rare I see someone who can make consistent clean contact but simply can't reach a par 4 in more than 3 shots.  I'm not sure moving tee boxes up is the answer.

Honestly, I think the answer is the insane emphasis that instruction places on the long game to the expense of the short game.  I've had quite a few lessons, and not once, not once, has an instructor - some of whom I've seen many times - said "lets go work on chipping".  Its always "let me see you hit a 6 iron".  I'd take a guy who hits 200 off the tee and can use his wedge from the back tees over a guy who can hit 290 but can't make clean short game contact.

Everyone can post all they want, but this will never be fixed.  Its the same reason you see pickup basketball on a ten foot hoop - people want to play what the pros play.  You could put the weekend warrior pickup game hoops at 7 feet, and after a small get used to it period, scoring would be much easier.  But nobody wants to play on a 7 foot hoop.  This problem will always be a problem because of the psyche of the athlete.  I think short game deficiency in instruction leads to much higher scores than the tee issue.

I also think sean_miller made a great point that was somewhat overlooked:

Quote:

Not sure I follow every train of logic people have about course design, but I like the idea of setting a cours up where longer players can carry some hazards and end up with a safer tee shot. Why not reward people who have mastered that part of the game? Do I get to putt to a different hole with less break because I'm not so good with the flat stick? No, I need to practice with a purpose and get better at putting.

Really, really good point.

[oregongolfguy]

I pretty well agree with the chart posted earlier.....The courses that i play with the tee boxes i play usually range from 5800-6300.  That length seems to suit my distance well, and you can still design plenty of ways to make it difficult, strategically placed carries, bunkers that come out into the fairway at the right distance, elevation differences etc.  Risk reward, if you can squeeze that drive down the middle or to the target area be rewarded with a shorter iron, lay up and face a mid iron to the green....

[bunkerputt]

I was playing with some cousins and their kids yesterday and we played from the ladies/junior tees.  It took a ton of pressure off that I didn't even know was there.  First hole, par 5, normally Dr, 5i for me to get on in two, played it pin-high with 3w 8i with a putt for eagle.  Never took driver off the tee, took irons on a lot of tees, and always had a short iron into the green.  I also struck the ball incredibly well because there was no tendency to overswing.  I knew I had plenty of club if I just hit it smooth and solid.  I put the ball in some incredibly dreamy places I wish I could get to consistently from the tips.  The difference in scoring to me was a lot more than the difference in the course ratings would suggest.  I think all it takes is that few extra yards to get you out of your comfort zone, you start overswinging, and your swing breaks down.  Difficulty vs length just doesn't scale linearly because intimidation is either there or it isn't.  When it's there, the course may as well be a million yards.

[Aging Boomer]

I think building tour length courses for even tour players is a big waste of real estate.

I'd love to see what tour players would do on 6400 yard recreational player courses.

My club started life as a fitness and racquet sports facility without golf.  It abutted a muni which was built as a WPA project in the 1930s.  The place was in terrible disrepair and losing money for the town, but in the 70s,  our club, which is  not a member-equity club, bought and beautifully restored it.

It plays about 6200 yards at par 71, and that's just right for me.  If the town had been able to fix it up, and it were still open to the public, I think it would be next to impossibe to get onto.  It's actually fun, and also sufficiently challenging, for the average recreational player like myself to play.

[Mr3Wiggle]

Originally Posted by Aging Boomer

I think building tour length courses for even tour players is a big waste of real estate.

I'd love to see what tour players would do on 6400 yard recreational player courses.

I like this idea.  Even if it was only one tournament a year.  Play a course of normal length.  A good course, but not one of these ultra-long, tricked out courses.  It would be a birdie fest but it would be interesting.