It's All About the Ball - and Ego

[1badbadger]

13 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

The red tees are "senior" now? Not women's tees? (Sorry, I have been asleep for decades. When did this happen?). 

Many courses are moving away from the terms "ladies tees", "senior tees" etc because of the stigma.  You'll see more courses calling them by the color (red tees, white tees, black tees etc) or they may use forward tees, middle tees and back tees.

[DaveP043]

3 minutes ago, iacas said:

As you know some courses don't even use colors.

I think Caledonia uses different kinds of ducks, for example.

And Tobacco Road uses different kinds of plow attachments.  

[iacas]

1 minute ago, CarlSpackler said:

USGA's National course rating database is starting to incorporate slope/ratings for men AND women on the same set of tees. This allows you as a man to play from the forward most tees and it is adjusted accordingly.

Yes, they are.  More work for me!

[70sSanO]

2 minutes ago, phillyk said:

You'll find some courses have added family tee boxes.  These are typically placed in the fairways at less than 200yds for those who are new to the game or want to play something different.  

When we were visiting our sons in AZ we played on a course like this.  My wife hardly plays, and not that well, and she played from these tees and the 4 of us had a blast.  She actually enjoyed playing instead of being frustrated.

By the way, I push Par 3 courses, but I don't enjoy hitting into 100 yard holes that much.  I push them because that it is a valid option for beginners, very short hitters to be able to get out and enjoy the game.

John

[Blackjack Don]

4 minutes ago, CarlSpackler said:

This allows you as a man to play from the forward

I have never, ever, not even ever, seen a man play from the red tees. Not sure there is a manly duck you could put on that tee box to get a man to hit from there. Am I the only one who is seeing it the way I am?

[iacas]

Just now, Blackjack Don said:

Am I the only one who is seeing it the way I am?

Maybe.

I play the forward-most tees a few times a month. I have my macho college players play from the forward-most tees two or three times a season.

Play the tees that suit you.

It's that simple.

[Jeremie Boop]

5 minutes ago, CarlSpackler said:

USGA's National course rating database is starting to incorporate slope/ratings for men AND women on the same set of tees. This allows you as a man to play from the forward most tees and it is adjusted accordingly.

This is an interesting development, and I think I've seen it already in use a few courses I've played. Having correct slope/ratings for each tee for both male and female will probably help eliminate the "stigma" of playing a specific set of tees that used to be designated women's. I prefer to play whatever tee's have a decent rating if I can, as opposed to tees that have a low rating. Score wise, my index is pretty much always better on courses that have higher ratings, and I always feel better about my score if I do well on a more difficult course compared to an easier course. 

[Blackjack Don]

2 minutes ago, 70sSanO said:

By the way, I push Par 3 courses, but I don't enjoy hitting into 100 yard holes that much.

Because we know from playing full courses. Par 3's suck! We duffers rarely hit the green, no matter what. We rarely par one. If I have ever birdied one, it was total luck.

1 minute ago, iacas said:

Maybe.

I play the forward-most tees a few times a month. I have my macho college players play from the forward-most tees two or three times a season.

Play the tees that suit you.

It's that simple.

I do. Most don't. The game is populated by people who don't. 

My guess is they don't know any different. They are without clue. Fix that, and it might go a long way to stop the bleeding. 600,000 people is a lot of greens fees.

[DaveP043]

Just now, Blackjack Don said:

Because we know from playing full courses. Par 3's suck! We duffers rarely hit the green, no matter what. We rarely par one. If I have ever birdied one, it was total luck.

Wait a minute.  You don't like long holes, because you can't hit your driver.  You want to play from 200 yards to have more fun.  And now the par-3 holes suck too?  I rarely suggest this, but have you considered that golf may just not be the game for you?

[jbishop15]

3 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

I have never, ever, not even ever, seen a man play from the red tees. Not sure there is a manly duck you could put on that tee box to get a man to hit from there. Am I the only one who is seeing it the way I am?

They've been the forward tees forever, at least around where I'm from. Plenty of people play from them, either for distance or scoring issues or for age. I've played them for fun many times; it's a great way to see the course from a different perspective. 

[Jeremie Boop]

2 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

Because we know from playing full courses. Par 3's suck! We duffers rarely hit the green, no matter what. We rarely par one. If I have ever birdied one, it was total luck.

Strangely enough, based on my GG stats, I do better on par 3's (+1.04) than I do on par 4's (+1.25), but do the best on par 5's (+1.02). Then again, I'm pretty atypical when it comes to most of what you expect to see from someone with my index. 

[iacas]

4 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

I do.

That's not what you've been saying here in this topic.

4 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

My guess is they don't know any different. They are without clue. Fix that, and it might go a long way to stop the bleeding. 600,000 people is a lot of greens fees.

What bleeding? What's 600k people?

If golf shrinks a little, that's fine by me. You're dead wrong in what you said in the other thread about people not being able to afford it. Less demand may even lower prices slightly. You think Pebble Beach is expensive because it has low demand?

[DaveP043]

3 minutes ago, jbishop15 said:

They've been the forward tees forever, at least around where I'm from. Plenty of people play from them, either for distance or scoring issues or for age. I've played them for fun many times; it's a great way to see the course from a different perspective. 

I had to laugh, Hunter, you're just too young to have seen the days when the front tees were always Red, and were always labeled "Ladies" on the scorecard.  As an old curmudgeon, I tend to resist change, but the move away from standardized colors, and gender labels on tees, has been a very good trend in my view.

[Blackjack Don]

1 minute ago, iacas said:

You think Pebble Beach is expensive because it has low demand?

Seriously? Expensive is exclusive and exclusive is expensive. The base of golfers who can afford PB--and who can convince their wives--is tiny. If shrinking it that much is okay with you, how did you miss the polo boom?

And you know I have no problem playing anywhere it's good for me. Duh.

1 minute ago, DaveP043 said:

I had to laugh, Hunter, you're just too young to have seen the days when the front tees were always Red, and were always labeled "Ladies" on the scorecard.  As an old curmudgeon, I tend to resist change, but the move away from standardized colors, and gender labels on tees, has been a very good trend in my view.

I could not agree more.

[iacas]

2 minutes ago, Blackjack Don said:

Seriously? Expensive is exclusive and exclusive is expensive. The base of golfers who can afford PB--and who can convince their wives--is tiny. If shrinking it that much is okay with you, how did you miss the polo boom?

Reference your comments in the other thread about the game shrinking and then nobody being able to afford it.

Care to address this comment, since ostensibly this is more on topic as it's in the OP?

On 1/6/2017 at 0:02 PM, Blackjack Don said:

I can hit a soft ball 250, some days. If I tried to hit a new tour ball, I'd be lucky to get a buck-fifty.

That makes no sense.

[Hacker James]

Hells' Bell's.......take up miniature golf for heavens sake!

[Blackjack Don]

7 minutes ago, iacas said:

Reference your comments in the other thread about the game shrinking and then nobody being able to afford it.

It's become a cliche. Even the USGA acknowledges the three challenges to the game: It's hard, it's expensive, and it's time consuming. Golf Now helps a lot, but it might not be the best for the courses. Golf Now does make it less expensive.

Yes, you're second quote doesn't make sense. Not the first time for me. How about you? 

[Kalnoky]

19 minutes ago, Jeremie Boop said:

Having correct slope/ratings for each tee for both male and female will probably help eliminate the "stigma" of playing a specific set of tees that used to be designated women's. 

That's how it is on my home course.