The Definitive Pace of Play Thread

[colin007]

Pace of play - we played a 5 hr round on Sunday and I'll blame the length of the course. There was no waiting on the tees, or to hit the second shots, or to hit onto the green until the last hole when I got stuck in a bunker. No one held up play. It was just a long walk on a links course. It was the same pace that would take about 3.5 hrs on my compact home course.

I'm not what I'd call a fast player. I think about the shot as I'm approaching the ball. Then I take distance. Grab club. Pick my target. Line up the shot. Step into the ball. Clear my head, and take my swing. I don't take a practice swing unless it's a lie I'm not familiar with.

I'm a rhythm player. I get into a rhythm and things throw me out of it. No one likes to stand around for 5 minutes for each shot. I hate it when courses send out fivesomes, and then a twosome and a single. That's bad time management.

im sorry but i dont see the length of the course adding 1.5 hrs to a round that should have taken 3.5

[BubblesUSMC]

Lihu hit it on the head IMO

this is one of those nasty by products of the 6-7 min tee time...  I know its only 3 minutes but it makes a hell of difference in pace of play if more people started the 10 and even 12 min intervals.

[Duffydog]

Pretty good post. When I'm waiting on a group, that I can clearly see knows how to play the game. I tend to just take is a bad timing  and take it for what it is. The frustrating thing for me is watching a group in front of me. Hole after hole, fu%ing around and not playing ready golf, Big difference.

Same here...Let's all walk over to Fred's ball, stand and watch him hit, then let's go over to Joe's, Bob's etc. 5 minutes looking in dense bush for a ball, not thinking about where you park your cart, clubs in relation to the next tee. Plumb bobbing a two foot putt for 7. Not letting a clearly faster group play through, as someone said 330 out and waiting to hit because you "might catch one" if someone hits up to the green from 330 out, chances are it's rolling and I am likely to say good shot than anything else.

Courses having tee times too close together. Marshall's not doing their jobs. Have some stones and make that slow group skip a hole.

I played a course this year that took 5:45 to play!

[Fourputt]

Lihu hit it on the head IMO

this is one of those nasty by products of the 6-7 min tee time...  I know its only 3 minutes but it makes a hell of difference in pace of play if more people started the 10 and even 12 min intervals.

Trouble is it also makes a huge difference on the course's bottom line.  Courses have to do a balancing act between maximizing profits and offering a good playing experience.  Some fail to make a profit and disappear, others fail to offer the quality experience that many of us are seeking.

[Dave2512]

Less about rushing than what leads to slow play is anything but golf. People dawdle unnecessarily and golfing becomes waiting. I like to be outside and I enjoy golf. I don't enjoy watching people dawdle and do things that make my golf take longer than it should. Akin to when I owned a sports car. Loved driving it but twisting around on mountain roads was more enjoyable than being in a traffic jam.

[RGoosen]

I just thought of an idea. Resort courses or sites that have multiple courses could try the following: One of their courses could be set at 3:30-3:45 for pace of play that they enforce. The other course could bet set at 4:14-4:30. They could survey groups coming off the courses and see their enjoyment level. Seems 90%+ members here would prefer the faster of the two courses. I would be interested in seeing how the casual golf would change the results. My guess is that at least 75% would prefer the faster pace and the course would also have the potential to get more golfers out in a day.

[Psyber]

Seems easier to just limit tee times and charge more. If I frequently found myself in jam ups like you guys describe I'd rather pay more and have less people out there. I also live a nice single life and can spend whatever I really want on golf within some reason.

[Dave2512]

Or just enforce the dang POP. I see people doing crazy things out there.

[Strandly]

Since I've started playing I always see people talking about how long rounds take and complaining about 4.5-5 hour rounds. I just don't see what the big rush is. Sure if people are doing deliberately slow things but if I go out to play on a Sunday I know it will be crowded and it will take a while. It's a weekend, what else do I possibly have to do for 4-5 hours besides hanging out outside while enjoying a few beers and playing a round?

It's not necessarily a rush.  Like a couple people said it can mess with your personal tempo.  If you like to just go out and hack some balls around and have a few beers you probably wouldn't notice but once you get better at the game long breaks between shots can sometimes disrupt your focus.  Also, just because I have the day off doesn't mean I want to piss the entire thing away on a golf course.  Maybe I have a 1:30 tee time and plan to catch a 7 o'clock movie, getting stuck behind a group who is playing like they have the rest of their lives to finish the round is disruptive and annoying.

[RFKFREAK]

Or just enforce the dang POP. I see people doing crazy things out there.

@colin007 might laugh but this !

[baller7345]

A few things that always makes me laugh are the people who wait for a 330 yard green to clear when they clearly can't drive that far, and of course, when they drive consistently 180 yards and wait hopefully for the green to clear from 220 yards away.

I've said this in the pet peeve thread but this is sometimes a mental thing for some people.  I probably average about 230 for a decent pedestrian drive and if I'm having an outstanding day I may put that up to about 245, but still I tend to wait until people are out of my immediate site because for me just knowing that there are people out there can mess with my psyche and I spend too much time worrying about them causing bad shots.  Now at some point this becomes silly, like if I'm 250 yards away on a par 5 and people are on the green, but generally I'll let a green clear or let the group move farther up the fairway just to clear it from my mind.

Also there are times where I know I can't reach a group but as I know I can come fairly close I won't hit.  I personally don't care to here a ball land 20-30 yards behind me and so I try not to do it to other people.

[Lihu]

Seems easier to just limit tee times and charge more. If I frequently found myself in jam ups like you guys describe I'd rather pay more and have less people out there. I also live a nice single life and can spend whatever I really want on golf within some reason.

This is why many people join a private club.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lihu

A few things that always makes me laugh are the people who wait for a 330 yard green to clear when they clearly can't drive that far, and of course, when they drive consistently 180 yards and wait hopefully for the green to clear from 220 yards away.

I've said this in the pet peeve thread but this is sometimes a mental thing for some people.  I probably average about 230 for a decent pedestrian drive and if I'm having an outstanding day I may put that up to about 245, but still I tend to wait until people are out of my immediate site because for me just knowing that there are people out there can mess with my psyche and I spend too much time worrying about them causing bad shots.  Now at some point this becomes silly, like if I'm 250 yards away on a par 5 and people are on the green, but generally I'll let a green clear or let the group move farther up the fairway just to clear it from my mind.

Also there are times where I know I can't reach a group but as I know I can come fairly close I won't hit.  I personally don't care to here a ball land 20-30 yards behind me and so I try not to do it to other people.

Yeah, my example was more directed towards the average golfer who carries 180. If a ball rolls up to me 240-250 yards away, I don't really care. If it whizzes over my head, yes, that could be a little bit of a problem. Doesn't happen all that often, because most longer hitters know how far they hit.

[DrvFrShow]

im sorry but i dont see the length of the course adding 1.5 hrs to a round that should have taken 3.5

This was not your muni goat track. Here I agree a round can be played in 3.5 hrs with a foursome. This was a spread out championship links course with very hilly terrain, pot bunkers, sloped fairways, very interesting greens, and long distances between holes. Perhaps a PGA professional could have walked it in 4:15 hrs playing solo, but not your average 20 HC golfer. I think I walked about 8 miles.

So we're on a par 5. Two of our foursome have hit. I'm waiting and my other playing partner is waiting for the green to clear 210 away. I'm pulling a 5W, he's pulling a hybrid. I hit and land pin high right of the green. He's on the green putting for eagle and sinks it. Could we have hit shorter clubs and moved on so that those on the tee hit? Yes, but this for me was a 466 par 5 and I had a shot at it so take it. It was realistic. I'm sorry, but we can actually hit those shots.

[Lihu]

[QUOTE name="colin007" url="/t/84345/whats-the-rush/18#post_1197503"]   im sorry but i dont see the length of the course adding 1.5 hrs to a round that should have taken 3.5 [/QUOTE] This was not your muni goat track. Here I agree a round can be played in 3.5 hrs with a foursome. This was a spread out championship links course with very hilly terrain, pot bunkers, sloped fairways, very interesting greens, and long distances between holes. Perhaps a PGA professional could have walked it in 4:15 hrs playing solo, but not your average 20 HC golfer. I think I walked about 8 miles. So we're on a par 5. Two of our foursome have hit. I'm waiting and my other playing partner is waiting for the green to clear 210 away. I'm pulling a 5W, he's pulling a hybrid. I hit and land pin high right of the green. He's on the green putting for eagle and sinks it. Could we have hit shorter clubs and moved on so that those on the tee hit? Yes, but this for me was a 466 par 5 and I had a shot at it so take it. It was realistic. I'm sorry, but we can actually hit those shots.

Chambers Bay? In any case, 8 miles is a long walk. It's like an extra hole of walking per hole. :-O

[DrvFrShow]

Chambers Bay?

In any case, 8 miles is a long walk. It's like an extra hole of walking per hole.

It was The Home Course. I put an aerial photo in another thread. It's more spread out than Chambers. Really nice course, though.

[dkolo]

I wait for greens to clear within about 240, less if I'm definitely not trying to max out distance. People do dumb things like walking off the front of the green to their carts or to pick up a wedge and I don't want to be in a situation where I hit that guy.

[turtleback]

Some of these sound pretty excessive. I haven't had to wait 20 minutes to hit my tee shot yet but it's not uncommon to have to wait 5 or so. I suppose this will change once all the seniors get down here for the winter...

Those seniors probably play faster than the folks playing now.  4.5-5 hour is glacial.

Seems easier to just limit tee times and charge more. If I frequently found myself in jam ups like you guys describe I'd rather pay more and have less people out there. I also live a nice single life and can spend whatever I really want on golf within some reason.

If your rounds are 4.5-5 hours then you do encounter the jam-ups, you just do not realize it.  And since playing faster than that is viewed as "rushing" by you, you are probably part of the reason for those jam-ups and long round times.

It is almost a universal rule that anyone who complains about "rushing" is themselves a slow player.

[Fourputt]

Seems easier to just limit tee times and charge more. If I frequently found myself in jam ups like you guys describe I'd rather pay more and have less people out there. I also live a nice single life and can spend whatever I really want on golf within some reason.

Do the math sometime and you might change your mind.  Most courses can't justify that much of an increase, and even if they could, it might not be to spread out the tee times.  They might just add more to the bottom line and leave the tee sheet as it is.  If the course is full and they are making a profit, then the assumption is that they are doing something right, so why change?  If they aren't full then it's a moot point - raising prices will only have a negative impact - they have to figure out what is causing golfers to stay away and fix that first.

I did the calculation for my old home course.  They currently alternate tee time intervals 8 and 9 minutes from open until 10:30, then go to 9 minutes for the rest of the day.  If they went to 10 minutes, it amounts to about 1½ tee times per hour.  Figuring just the prime time first 5 hours each day, which they usually fill 7 days a week, and $45 average for a mix of riders and walkers, resident and nonresident,  the math is as follows:

They lose 6 players per hour @ $45 each x 6 = $270.  $270 x 5 hours of prime time = $1350 per day.  $1350 x 7 days = $9450 lost revenue per week.   That's a big hunk of change.