A Lengthy Discussion

 


Long has been the debate over the perceived push for longer courses or the accommodation thereof in the game.  Frankly, this turns into a much broader topic than should be attempted in one post, but let’s take a shot and see where this goes.

 

Where are we now on the whole issue of advanced technology and the effects in golf? Our prescriptive clubs, super shafts and Pro V1’s have left us all scratching our heads as to what to do. We have turned repeatedly to our governing bodies for help in the USGA and the R&A, and aside from some interesting research and predictable administrational responses, we have really not seen much advancement on the issue. 

 

As an architect I have witnessed a number of resulting problems firsthand, including developers and green chairmen composing their courses to accommodate longer flying shots to satisfy their claims of being valid modern tests or “championship worthy”. While in truth, most of them had better odds of winning the lotto!  In the late ‘90’s and early/mid ‘00’s we saw so much yearning for length, it was definitely vogue and frequently an act of one-upmanship for competing clubs.   The going formula was to sign on the most recognizable designer and then produce the best (longest) course, all in a flash effort to market and sell real estate and memberships as quickly and profitably as one could.  Perhaps they attracted a few members in the beginning, but the aftermath has left an abundance of courses that are too hard to play and too expensive to care for; many of which have now fallen from favor.

 

Maybe the improved equipment has helped the average player marginally with some length and consistency, but from what I have witnessed it seems that which was gained also resulted in a net loss in control. With newfound length, our errant shots now stray even wider off-line and wildly into harms way – sort of a loaded weapon for most of us!   That leaves the architect begging for more land with which to work, expensive land to address safety concerns where golf corridors are surrounded by home sites, not to mention enough space to avoid 18 identically straight holes.

 

We are now in the midst of an era where most golf facilities have been forced to find new ways to survive – by cutting their maintenance measures, staffs and means – and having to settle on a product presentation that is a compromise from the norm.  And maybe that will ultimately prove to be a good thing, but for now the waning memberships suggest otherwise.   Again, the whole mantra of length and advancement seems to have gotten us all in a bit of trouble.

 

Yet, I cannot help but to ponder really whom we are lengthening the courses for in the first place? The majority of players seem find abundant pleasure and enjoyment on a course between 6000 and 6500 yards… sometimes even shorter.  Are we really that naïve to think that professionals and the smallest facet of single digit handicaps have that much influence over our game, our courses and our enjoyment?  What has all that technology done for the sustainability of our courses? Heck, I can’t recall ever shunning an opportunity to play a course because it fell short of 7000 yards… in fact I am certain to have more enjoyment if they are not in that ilk.  They certainly tend to have more palatable green fees, not to mention more likeable traits.

 

The ASGCA has recently taken a hard stance in trying to communicate our collective need for facilities that are geared more for our enjoyment.  Today, being more accessible and more affordable is the trend.  Our golf courses should be geared toward attracting new players to the game, taking less time and having the ability to be more competitive with other recreational opportunities that lobby for our time and our discretionary dollars. Long, difficult courses certainly don’t seem to fit that recipe and or any practical application for the majority of golfers today.  Architects are actively promoting “bunny slope” facilities that can make good use of smaller land parcels and are but a fraction of the cost to develop and operate compared to the average 18-hole facility.  So far, it is slow to take hold on the development side.

 

The National Golf Foundation recently identified three dominant reasons why golf has flat-lined. “The common complaint these days is that golf is too expensive, too time-consuming, and simply too hard too play, “ says one industry expert. “You find a solution to these problems, and the game may begin growing again, It’s future may rely on what we learned in the past.”  The past… as in the 1930’s, when noted architect William Langford was writing articles advocating 6-hole courses with multiple tees to speed play and accommodate play for the average man.

 

Clearly, this becomes a broader topic than “length”, but it provides an indication of just how far off-line we have tipped as a recreational industry.

 

 Ponder this:

  1. Stop adjusting courses to provide for unnecessary length. A few back tees are occasionally appropriate if justifiably studied and planned, but when you start moving the bunkers and features around and changing the original design intent, the course will never fit right again or be enjoyed as it was intended. And for whom are we lengthening? Less than 1% seems to be the going rate.
  2. If we can’t get on track in controlling the advances in equipment, then why not at least handicap the pros by taking the tee peg away? Scotland’s Master Greenskeeper, Gordon Irvine, proposes to do just that… if the pros are in fact the greatest ball strikers in the world, then allow them to go about their work without the benefit of the tee.  That sort of gives a whole new perspective on hitting the driver off the deck…no?  And more importantly, we may be able keep courses the way they are and without having to rely on the longest venues for tournaments or constantly tweaking others for the same. I can see it already… the equipment manufacturers will be hard at work right away developing the new “deck driver” so the pros can regain their edge.
  3. Embrace this period of scaling back and doing more with less.  Use it to become more efficient and more responsible.  Become more creative and welcome change.  Realize the values that are most important to people and golf. 
  4. Golf is a great game, no matter how or where you play it.  Those with the ability should seriously consider the value of developing less traditional facilities or reopening old ones.  Re-launch the Mom and Pop courses and promote fun activities. They represent a more attainable economic return and are an attractive land use option.
  5. If you have kids…. introduce them to golf.  Use the game as an opportunity to spend time together.  Explain the values of the game and how it can be enjoyed throughout their lives.  We need the next generation to be playing golf along with the proper facilities to facilitate their introduction.  If we don’t, I worry what golf may look like in 15 years.
Comments
I couldn't agree more Drew, I have been involved with some very high profile renovations in the last 5 years and its a shame to see what has to be done to "Tiger Proof" these great old courses. While some can be modified to adjust to the golfers new found (bought) length by adding back tees and rearranging a few bunkers , Many are landlocked and can not be lengthened to the extent needed for the longer ball flights, and in order to keep it strategic (and playable) for all players, short and long most of the bunkers have to be moved into positions that make it difficult for shaping to tie in to the natural landforms and look right. As much as I love to work where history has been made, I somehow feel that an injustice has been done to some of the classic courses as of late. It is just my opinion, but I think the USGA needs to look further into curbing the desire for people to hit the ball farther and make ball placement more a part of the game.
Comment by Brian Jennings - posted on 02/20/2012 07:16 pm

Love the idea of no tee. Great thoughts!!
Comment by MRP - posted on 02/17/2012 05:47 am

As usual, Drew, you are spot on. I would add that deeper faces on some of the bunkers and a little more robust rough would do a lot to discourage the "bomb and gouge" style and re-emphasize accuracy and shaping shots when appropriate. Do we really need more 7,800- yard courses that only a handful of guys can play and have fun? Our little Ottawa Park course in Toledo is a perfect example of a track that is playable by everyone and requires only four whacks with the driver for 18 holes. Hitting a 3-iron off the tee (with or without a peg) can be a lot of fun!
Comment by Beechie - posted on 02/16/2012 11:04 am

Search blog posts


Tags

9 Hole Course A.W. Tillinghast Adjusting Course Length Affordable Golf Alister Mackenzie Architectural Study Tour ASGCA Audubon Country Club Augusta Country Club Augusta National Golf Club Australia Golf Courses Baltusrol - Lower Course Bandon Dunes Bandon Preserve Bandon Trails Bethpage - Black Course Bill Coore Billy Payne Bobby Jones Bunker Renovation Bunkers Burnham & Berrow C.B. Macdonald C.H. Alison Canal Shores Champions Golf Club Charles Banks Chicago Golf Club Chicago golf courses Classic Courses Clifford Roberts Community Golf Country Club of North Carolina Course Design Course length Course Rankings Cypress Point Daniel Burnham Design Elements Devereux Emmet Donald Ross Donald Trump Doral Drainage Innovations Drew Rogers Enjoyable Golf Environmental Golf European Courses Family Golf First Links Florida Golf Courses GCSAA Geoff Shackelford George Thomas Gil Hanse Golden Age of Golf Architecture Golf Golf & Natural Disasters Golf & Travel Golf and Fishing Golf and the Landscape Golf and the Prairie Style Movement Golf Business Models Golf Course Architecture Golf course Architecture Magazine Golf Course Communities Golf Course Design Trends Golf Course Development Golf Course Improvements Golf Course Maintenance Golf Course Marketing and Publicity Golf in Brazil Golf in Houston Golf in Portugal Golf in Toledo, Ohio Golf Magazines and Books Golf on Long Island Golf Technology Golfing Destinations Grass Conversions Greens speeds Growing the Game H.S. Colt Hazards in golf Heather and gorse Heathland Golf Herbert Fowler Huntercombe Hurricane Irma Impacts of weather on golf Inverness Club Jackie Burke, Jr. James Braid James Foulis Jason Way JDR Jens Jensen John Low Kerry Haigh - PGA Kids Golf Lake Zurich Golf Club Links Golf Lowes Island Club Machu Pichu Maidstone Club Making Golf More Fun March Madness Matt Adams, PGA Tour Radio Max Behr Merion Mike Davis Mike Keiser Miromar Lakes Golf Club My Process National Golf Links of America Newport National Golf Club Non-Traditional Golf North American Courses Oitavos Dunes Old Course - St. Andrews Old Elm Club Old MacDonald Old Tom Morris Pacific Dunes Par 3 Courses Pebble Beach Perry Maxwell Pete Dye PGA Tour Pinehurst #2 poa annua greens Practice Facilities Public Golf Quail West Golf & Country Club R & A Renovation and Restoration Resort Golf Riviera Country Club Robert Hunter Royal Cinque Ports Royal North Devon Royal St. Georges Royal Troon Seminole Golf Club Short Courses Short Par Fours Short Par Threes SNAG Golf Social Side of Golf Speed of Play St. Enodoc St. Georges Hill Stimpmeter Stoke Poges Strategic golf Strategic Options Streamsong Streamsong Sunningdale Surrey Swinley Forest Sylvania Country Club T.J. Auclair, PGA.com Tee It Forward Template Holes The Berkshire The Masters Tom Dunn Tom Simpson Tournament Golf Trump Golf Trump National Golf Club - Washington, D.C. Turf conversion ultradwarf bermudagrass USGA Walter Travis Walton Heath Water and Turf Management Wethered & Simpson Why Golf is Fun Width and golf William Flynn Willie Park, Jr. winter kill