Three 6-hole loops?

[Joey G]

http://www.golfcoursearchitecture.net/content/six-hole-golf-what-do-the-architects-think

Interesting read on golf course designs going to three 6-hole loops rather than two 9-hole to make it easy to play 6-holes rather than 9.

Is this becoming a trend with new courses?

[Patch]

I have not encountered a 3, 6 hole loop course yet. I do like the idea however. I have seen 3, 9 hole loops before. 

I would imagine a more compact 18 hole lay out would be some what quicker to play. Much like an excutive course might be. 

From a scoring point of view, when I play now, I play the 18 holes in groups of 6 holes. Gives me 3 starting points to adjust my game if something starts to go south in my game. My scoring goal for each of those 3 groups is the number 27. I know a couple guys who play their 18 holes in groups of 3. 

There is a guy up in eastern Oregon who turned a few acres into his own 18 hole course, using only 6 holes. 

[woodzie264]

It would certainly make playing a few holes after work, or on a busy weekend, easier

[Ernest Jones]

Love this idea. Great way to provide more options without losing any. Pay to play 6, 12 or 18 holes. Make one of the loops bend in towards the clubhouse at the halfway point so folks can easily play 9 if desired. Not sure how to keep those scores for habicap purposes but I believe the system already has a means to account for partial and unfinished rounds, so that shouldn't be an issue at all. 

[RussUK]

This, for me, would be the perfect number. Sometimes 18 is too much but 9 is just too few. being able to play 12 holes would be just right.

My local course used to offer 12 holes but it caused a few problems as there was no easy way back to the clubhouse from the 12th/13th so they went back to either 18 or 9 holes.

There was a 6 hole course behind where is used to live. Place called Castlefields. Its the oldest course in west yorkshire apparently.

[jsgolfer]

I too haven't encountered a course with this option, though I've never really looked for one either.  

It is an interesting idea, but you'd have to have all three 6 hole loops end near the clubhouse, meaning you'd need enough room for 6 holes (3 starting and 3 finishing) near the clubhouse, and then you'd need a way to get someone who wants to play 9 close to the clubhouse as well.  I could see land issues being problematic for a course like this, at least in my area.

I play 12 holes at our course frequently, when I'm pressed for time.  

 

[Club Rat]

I think it's a good concept. It would provide golf for many who are in a time restraint, benefit new and younger golfers.
Playing only six holes also provides a person time to work on their game at the range, then apply their practice on course.
Golfers may even have time to enjoy a "Brewski" with companions afterwards.

I think the key element is the reduced the time required and could have popularity by many. 
It could be popular for after work golf leagues, junior events and promote golfers to walk the shorter courses.

I see a lot of positive upside an benefit for the game and course owners, especially Municipal owned courses.
Not to mention annual operational reduced costs.  

[David in FL]

1 hour ago, jsgolfer said:

It is an interesting idea, but you'd have to have all three 6 hole loops end near the clubhouse, meaning you'd need enough room for 6 holes (3 starting and 3 finishing) near the clubhouse, and then you'd need a way to get someone who wants to play 9 close to the clubhouse as well.  I could see land issues being problematic for a course like this, at least in my area.

I see that as an issue too.

 

31 minutes ago, Club Rat said:

Not to mention annual operational reduced costs.  

Why would 18 holes split into 3 6's have reduced operating costs over the same 18 holes split traditionally?

 

I really see this as a solution in search of a problem.  If you only have time to play 6 holes, or 12, then simply stop at that point.  The important piece, as discussed in another recent thread, is to convince a course to implement some form of incremental pricing.  Whether it's hole by hole, or maybe multiples of 3 or 6 holes. That accomplishes the same thing without having to redesign the course itself.

[jkelley9]

I absolutely think it's a good idea. (3) set of 6-holes would be a fantastic number not only because it maintains the standard 18-hole course ratings and such, it also maintains being easily/evenly dividable by 3. 

6 holes would be a great after-work number especially for the shorter days without as much daylight. I could easily finish in 45 minutes to 1 hour walking.

It's enough holes to make some mistakes and also give yourself some opportunities to "come back."

12-holes would also be a great number for me. It would only take maybe 1.5-2 hours walking. It's plenty of golf. I actually wish 12 holes was the standard full course. 18 holes is often too long for me unless I'm committing a large portion of my day to it. Not just because of time, but energy as well. 

[David in FL]

8 minutes ago, jkelley9 said:

I absolutely think it's a good idea. (3) set of 6-holes would be a fantastic number not only because it maintains the standard 18-hole course ratings and such, it also maintains being easily/evenly dividable by 3. 

6 holes would be a great after-work number especially for the shorter days without as much daylight. I could easily finish in 45 minutes to 1 hour walking.

It's enough holes to make some mistakes and also give yourself some opportunities to "come back."

12-holes would also be a great number for me. It would only take maybe 1.5-2 hours walking. It's plenty of golf. I actually wish 12 holes was the standard full course. 18 holes is often too long for me unless I'm committing a large portion of my day to it. Not just because of time, but energy as well. 

Assuming a course implemented incremental pricing, whether per hole, or in multiples of 3 or 6, what benefit would a special design 6/6/6 layout provide that you couldn't get from your normal course?

[jkelley9]

17 minutes ago, David in FL said:

Assuming a course implemented incremental pricing, whether per hole, or in multiples of 3 or 6, what benefit would a special design 6/6/6 layout provide that you couldn't get from your normal course?

3 main things:

1. The layout would be friendlier for finishing @ the clubhouse when finished with 6 or 12.

2. With that type of layout adopted by a course I would think it could be possible to rate a full 6-hole stretch, per stretch. Right now if I did that it would be a mathematical headache and may not even be doable (assuming I kept a HC)? Haven't tried it, since you have to report a minimum of 7 holes per USGA I believe. Could be wrong on that. Not sure how you report a rating on 7 or 8 or 10, etc holes. Do you average the hole handicap ratings or something? I dunno.

3. I could be wrong on this, thinking about it too simplistically, but I would think it could help with pace of play problems as it would be central to the clubhouse where groups could play through and marshals could probably keep a better eye out with a more central location.

[David in FL]

1 minute ago, jkelley9 said:

3 main things:

1. The layout would be friendlier for finishing @ the clubhouse when finished with 6 or 12.

2. With that type of layout adopted by a course I would think it could be possible to rate a full 6-hole stretch, per stretch. Right now if I did that it would be a mathematical headache and may not even be doable (assuming I kept a HC)? Haven't tried it, since you have to report a minimum of 7 holes per USGA I believe. Could be wrong on that. Not sure how you report a rating on 7 or 8 or 10, etc holes. Do you average the hole handicap ratings or something? I dunno.

3. I could be wrong on this, thinking about it too simplistically, but I would think it could help with pace of play problems as it would be central to the clubhouse where groups could play through and marshals could probably keep a better eye out with a more central location.

Then the only real benefit is swinging by the clubhouse more often.  Unfortunately, that also appears to be the biggest challenge to designing such a course.  

Most people seem to want shorter options than 9 or 18 because of time constraints.  I just don't see the need to redesign 18 holes into 3 6's in order to accommodate that.  It also makes playing 9 holes just as problematic as playing 6 or 12 is now.

I also wonder what course owners would think about the possible loss in revenue from people opting to play fewer holes during peak times.  If I owned a course, it's not something I'd encourage.

The more I think about it, the less I see much benefit or validity to the concept that can't be addressed in other ways without any of the downsides.

[RussUK]

1 hour ago, David in FL said:

I see that as an issue too.

 

Why would 18 holes split into 3 6's have reduced operating costs over the same 18 holes split traditionally?

 

I really see this as a solution in search of a problem.  If you only have time to play 6 holes, or 12, then simply stop at that point.  The important piece, as discussed in another recent thread, is to convince a course to implement some form of incremental pricing.  Whether it's hole by hole, or maybe multiples of 3 or 6 holes. That accomplishes the same thing without having to redesign the course itself.

This has hit the nail on the head. If courses allowed you to pay for multiples of 3 it would keep most of us happy. The only problem would be enforcing it in regards to paying for 6 and playing more.

We dont have course marshalls at any of the courses i play and im sure there will be some who would take advantage of it.

[JGus]

7 minutes ago, RussUK said:

We dont have course marshalls at any of the courses i play and im sure there will be some who would take advantage of it.

Most courses here don't have marshal's, and even ones that do, like the course I play who sends someone out on the weekends mainly just drive around and wouldn't know who paid for what anyways.

And having lived in North Yorkshire for 4 years, I agree as I don't think once I left the clubhouse I ever seen anyone on the course other than maintenance folks, so I think taking advantage of the situation would easily happen on both sides of the pond.

Gus

[Groucho Valentine]

I like it. I hope it becomes a trend. 

[RussUK]

2 minutes ago, JGus said:

Most courses here don't have marshal's, and even ones that do, like the course I play who sends someone out on the weekends mainly just drive around and wouldn't know who paid for what anyways.

And having lived in North Yorkshire for 4 years, I agree as I don't think once I left the clubhouse I ever seen anyone on the course other than maintenance folks, so I think taking advantage of the situation would easily happen on both sides of the pond.

Gus

Have you inherited the Yorkshire trait of being "careful" (some would say stingy) with your money yet?. As my dad would say "Bloody hell, £10 for 6 holes, bit steep isnt it?"

Edited November 15, 2016 by RussUK

[JGus]

8 minutes ago, RussUK said:

Have you inherited the Yorkshire trait of being "careful" (some would say stingy) with your money yet?. As my dad would say "Bloody hell, £10 for 6 holes, bit steep isnt it?"

When I lived there, I can't say I didn't know some folks who had that trait, I personally didn't inherit it, but did have to plan out where I golfed every month based on the conversion rate.

I was actually more surprised at how "Private" the private clubs were and how small the membership numbers were.  Some people I knew would always talk about the only way to move up on the waiting list is to wait for people to die.  I played two of the private courses around there, and honestly don't know why people wanted to wait so long to be a member, guess it just comes down to being able to say they are a member there.

But back on topic...I'm not a fan of the 6-hole loop, I hate playing only 9 holes, couldn't imagine how I would feel only playing 6 holes.  I understand dropping in after work just to play some golf, and definitely understand the money side of it, but I think I'd rather go to the range for an hour compared to playing only 6 holes.

Gus

[nevets88]

17 hours ago, Joey G said:

Is this becoming a trend with new courses?

Lost count of how many times I paid for 18 and played 12 and not twilight rate. We are not made of time.