Your most unpopular Golf opinions?

[MountainKing]

2 minutes ago, Argonne69 said:

 

Can't one spend the extra hour with their buddies on the patio after the round enjoying a drink and chatting about their 4 hour round? Just because one finishes a round in a reasonable pace doesn't mean they have to make a beeline for the parking lot and head home. 

 

As you note, not everyone has the luxury of spending that extra hour on the course with their hands on their hips watching a player on the green spend 60 seconds aligning their ball for a 2 foot putt. Yeah, saw that last summer. Timed the clown and he took nearly two minutes to hole out.

 

 

 

You sir are spot on!  Everybody wins in your scenario.  The bros get to continue their hang, the guys who have places to be get to finish their round and get on with their day. 

[Double Mocha Man]

1 hour ago, MountainKing said:

 

 

Golf is not what most of us do for a living.  Slow play and backing up everybody behind you is selfish and arrogant. It's a shared space and people should act accordingly so they can enjoy the game, and allow others to enjoy it as well.  With golf being a hobby, people may have other things going on in their lives that they have to get to. 

 

Everybody should be able to book a round at 8am and know they'll be home around 1pm to do the family thing or take care of other business they have going on in their lives.  They shouldn't be forced to walk off the course 14 holes in because some clown decided he wanted to spend the day out there.  A guy who tees off in the fall at 1pm should have no problems finishing 18 hole, not having to walk off in the dark at hole 16 because the guys in front of him have no clue how sunsets work.

 

Thinking outside of your little world,  if you're seeing those frustrations, there's probably a bigger reason for it.  They paid and may be at risk of not finishing because they were hoping to play in 4:20, and are now stuck out there an extra hour because you decided the golf course is a good place to hang with your buddies.

 

As far as me, I've resorted to playing early before the clowns come out - or I'll stick to courses that I know have rangers out that actually enforce pace.

 

 

 

I used to play nine holes Twilight. I would backtime 2 hours from sunset to determine what time I needed to be on the first tee. I can't tell you how many slowpokes I encountered within the first three holes who claimed they'd be playing 18 holes. More often than not I still had to play the 9th hole at dusk, squinting to see my ball.

[Double Mocha Man]

52 minutes ago, Argonne69 said:

Can't one spend the extra hour with their buddies on the patio after the round enjoying a drink and chatting about their 4 hour round?

 

That's the perfect place to explain to your buddies how you made those 6 quadruple bogeys.  Blow by blow.

 

 

 

Edited September 26, 2024 by Double Mocha Man

[Warrior42111]

1 hour ago, Argonne69 said:

 

Can't one spend the extra hour with their buddies on the patio after the round enjoying a drink and chatting about their 4 hour round? Just because one finishes a round in a reasonable pace doesn't mean they have to make a beeline for the parking lot and head home. 

 

As you note, not everyone has the luxury of spending that extra hour on the course with their hands on their hips watching a player on the green spend 60 seconds aligning their ball for a 2 foot putt. Yeah, saw that last summer. Timed the clown and he took nearly two minutes to hole out.

 

 

I mean I don't hate a 3 hr round whatsoever. But if I'm teeing off after the first hour or 2 of tee times, I'm not going to expect all the group playing at a 4 hr pace with no open holes to part ways for anyone. 

 

The worst is around greens for sure. We got to go off LPGA national as a 5some in the morning as long as we kept place, so 4 of us are moving, and one guy is just taking his sweet time, not getting ready to putt if not away then doing their routine. I swear it's more frustrating when it's in your group. At least in the fairway I can chat with my partner while waiting.

[Nard_S]

Course I play does it correct. Pace is 4:20 if you are on or within that they say nothing even if group ahead is faster. Sundays are always 4:30 to 4:40. Really rare to hit quicker but it’s never 5 hours. Do I care at 4:40 pace? Never.

[Motoboss]

“Your place is behind the group ahead of you,

Not in front of the group behind you.”

 

If folks would adhere to this pace would fix itself.

[mshills]

Fast greens are often not better greens. 
 

I don’t like the Johnson size contest on who’s club’s greens roll what number. The sign announcing the current green speed at many clubs is the worst!

[birdiesNbourbon]

Tee boxes you play should be based on how long you can consistently hit the ball, not handicap.

 

People need to relax about pace of play.  If you want to play 3hr rounds on Saturday morning, go buy your own golf course.

 

[Argonne69]

Just now, birdiesNbourbon said:

Tee boxes you play should be based on how long you can consistently hit the ball, not handicap.

 

People need to relax about pace of play.  If you want to play 3hr rounds on Saturday morning, go buy your own golf course.

 

 

Should players wanting to play 5 to 6 hour rounds on a Saturday morning also be required to buy their own course?

 

[knock it close]

2 hours ago, Argonne69 said:

 

Should players wanting to play 5 to 6 hour rounds on a Saturday morning also be required to buy their own course?

 

Nah just like the rest of society you have to appease the worst. 

[hollabachgt]

3 hours ago, birdiesNbourbon said:

Tee boxes you play should be based on how long you can consistently hit the ball, not handicap.

 

So the ex-college baseball player who can consistently hit the ball over 300 yards, but never hits a fairway and is lucky to break 110 should play the tips;

 

while the senior player who can't hit the ball over 225 anymore, but beats his age 8 out of 10 round should be forced to play from the forward most tees?

[GowerND11]

22 minutes ago, hollabachgt said:

 

So the ex-college baseball player who can consistently hit the ball over 300 yards, but never hits a fairway and is lucky to break 110 should play the tips;

 

while the senior player who can't hit the ball over 225 anymore, but beats his age 8 out of 10 round should be forced to play from the forward most tees?

In fairness, if he can't hit over 225... He probably should play forward tees. Maybe most forward, maybe not. 

[hollabachgt]

6 minutes ago, GowerND11 said:

In fairness, if he can't hit over 225... He probably should play forward tees. Maybe most forward, maybe not. 

not going to disagree, but in this case the player is more than skilled to make that decision themselves. The first player, not so much.

[Chunkitgood]

Par 5’s are par 5’s because an expert golfer is expected to take three shots to get on the green and then two putt.  If he plays at his potential.

 

Not so that inexpert golfers can go for the green in 2 playing from the back tees so they can hope (maybe) one day to say they made an eagle.

[jda]

A lot of you all sound like that loser from the office that whines about rush hour when they know exactly how it is going to be every day.  That is the guy who you sign the group get-well card after needing a couple stents at an all-too-young age for worrying, complaining and obsessing about that which does not matter nor they can do anything about.

[nsxguy]

On 10/2/2024 at 4:31 PM, Motoboss said:

“Your place is behind the group ahead of you,

Not in front of the group behind you.”

 

If folks would adhere to this pace would fix itself.

 

Except that it is literally impossible. 

[nsxguy]

On 10/4/2024 at 12:50 PM, hollabachgt said:

 

So the ex-college baseball player who can consistently hit the ball over 300 yards, but never hits a fairway and is lucky to break 110 should play the tips;

 

while the senior player who can't hit the ball over 225 anymore, but beats his age 8 out of 10 round should be forced to play from the forward most tees?

 

So that ex-college player should hit from the reds ?

 

Or the senior player should play the tips ?

 

Both of them are equally ridiculous.

 

But for picking tee sets, length is often the best indicator,,,,,,, modified (somewhat) by ability.

[birdiesNbourbon]

On 10/4/2024 at 12:50 PM, hollabachgt said:

 

So the ex-college baseball player who can consistently hit the ball over 300 yards, but never hits a fairway and is lucky to break 110 should play the tips;

 

while the senior player who can't hit the ball over 225 anymore, but beats his age 8 out of 10 round should be forced to play from the forward most tees?

No, but he shouldn't be forced to play the forward tee's just because he can't break 110.  I would also guess if he's hitting it over 300, he's probably not slowing down pace of play.

 

I also would say that the number of people that fit that scenario in the world is very low.

 

For the senior player, I play with quite a few of these guy and they all play from the forward / 2nd forward tee's because they know they don't hit over 200 anymore. 

 

Either way, no one should be forced to play from any set of tee's, it's simply a recommendation. 

[Double Mocha Man]

21 minutes ago, birdiesNbourbon said:

I would also guess if he's hitting it over 300, he's probably not slowing down pace of play.

 

I would also suggest that more often than not he spends less than a minute looking for his lost ball in the woods or simply says, "Don't worry about it, I'll just drop a ball here."  That would contribute to his keeping up the pace.

[hollabachgt]

On 10/5/2024 at 4:35 PM, nsxguy said:

 

So that ex-college player should hit from the reds ?

 

Or the senior player should play the tips ?

 

Both of them are equally ridiculous.

 

But for picking tee sets, length is often the best indicator,,,,,,, modified (somewhat) by ability.

This is a situation where neither player should be playing from the front tees or the tips.
 

If a short player has the ability to score, they've demonstrated their game is greater than their length, and can play from a distance beyond what their length may suggest.

If a long player struggles to post a respectable score, they've demonstrated their game is weaker than their length, and should play from a shorter distance than their length might suggest.

Ability is clearly the best indicator, modified somewhat by length.

[nsxguy]

1 hour ago, hollabachgt said:

Ability is clearly the best indicator, modified somewhat by length.

 

Given that length is clearly the greatest factor in resistance to scoring and in rating courses, I'd suggest you have it backward.

 

Just an opinion. 

[jda]

In actuality, it is the middle game that matter.  A player with strong 3, 4, 5 iron (hybrid) game doesn't have to be long off of the tee whereas anybody should be good with 7/8 iron down.

[PeterJP]

This won't be that unpopular, as surely others have already mentioned this in these 61 pages, and I can't be the only one who much preferred Ping equipment when it was ugly, or at least utilitarian, as opposed to sleek and 'playerish' and looking like everything else from the other OEMs. I'm not talking Ping Zing ugly -- but boy, the s58 irons look a lot better to me and a lot more 'Ping' than the Blueprints or i59s, and there was no better looking driver head to me than the (non adjustable) G10 - so elegant in its plain functionality. 

Edited October 7, 2024 by PeterJP

[hollabachgt]

30 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

 

Given that length is clearly the greatest factor in resistance to scoring and in rating courses, I'd suggest you have it backward.

 

Just an opinion. 

While the system that is used to measure course difficulty does prioritizes distance in relationship to scoring. The fact that this measure of course difficulty is critical in measuring a players ability illustrates why ability should be the first factor of consideration in tee selection.

If a player's distance skills and their ability skills are incongruent, it would be most practical to err on the side of ability when selecting tees. A player with a lower ability rating and a longer distance potential would spotlight a much lower distance advantage in relation to scoring resistance when compared to other disadvantaged factors in relationship to scoring resistance.

 

Or in other words, Their skills in distance is not translating to their ability to get the ball in the hole in as few strokes as possible, suggesting they play from a longer distance does not aid them in effectively playing the game.

 

 

[RoyalMustang]

I'd rather play well and get a bit unlucky than shoot a one-off great score with a bunch of unsustainable luck involved. I'd rather my overall ability and game define me rather than my best-ever round. 

[RoyalMustang]

5 hours ago, hollabachgt said:

This is a situation where neither player should be playing from the front tees or the tips.
 

If a short player has the ability to score, they've demonstrated their game is greater than their length, and can play from a distance beyond what their length may suggest.

If a long player struggles to post a respectable score, they've demonstrated their game is weaker than their length, and should play from a shorter distance than their length might suggest.

Ability is clearly the best indicator, modified somewhat by length.

 

I'd agree. Hitting 300 yards from the tee is not the same as hitting 70% FIR at 300 yards. If you can consistently find the fairway from 300, play the tips. If you have to swing out of your shoes to play the tips, then move up a tee. You'll know when it's time to move back when you're consistently hitting 6-8 iron in on a par 5 and seeing birdie chances often. If you are playing those middle tees and constantly punching out from trees after your drive, who cares if you are 300 off the tee? Your game isn't strong enough yet for that length course. 

 

I played a tournament with a senior who had a sneaky good middle iron and short game. He seemed to always find the green with a 6 iron or hybrid and still score. He couldn't play senior tees due to tournament rules of course and his game was solid enough that he didn't have to.  

 

Our course has a "suggested tee box" based on length, but I'd add skill level to that as well. If you find yourself out of your comfort zone and squeezed due to distance, there's no shame in moving up. 

[N0rs3man]

I think each golf hole should have a maximum distance cap off the tee.

 

ie hole 1 400yd par 4. A big marker is in the middle of the fairway at 245 yards out. If you go past it’s a stroke and drop at the marker. It can change course to course or week to week. This would reward good distance control, add another aspect, save many shorter courses, and (maybe) lower the club head speed barrier for higher play

 

also I think basketball should have a maximum height per team on the court lol

[GowerND11]

1 hour ago, N0rs3man said:

I think each golf hole should have a maximum distance cap off the tee.

 

ie hole 1 400yd par 4. A big marker is in the middle of the fairway at 245 yards out. If you go past it’s a stroke and drop at the marker. It can change course to course or week to week. This would reward good distance control, add another aspect, save many shorter courses, and (maybe) lower the club head speed barrier for higher play

 

also I think basketball should have a maximum height per team on the court lol

 

God that sounds awful

[Double Mocha Man]

2 hours ago, N0rs3man said:

I think each golf hole should have a maximum distance cap off the tee.

 

ie hole 1 400yd par 4. A big marker is in the middle of the fairway at 245 yards out. If you go past it’s a stroke and drop at the marker. It can change course to course or week to week. This would reward good distance control, add another aspect, save many shorter courses, and (maybe) lower the club head speed barrier for higher play

 

also I think basketball should have a maximum height per team on the court lol

 

Like 32.5 ft?

 

Shouldn't there be like a maximum length putt (say 45 ft) that doesn't count because it's in the realm of luck?

 

 

 

Edited October 8, 2024 by Double Mocha Man

[MountainKing]

On 10/3/2024 at 6:03 AM, mshills said:

Fast greens are often not better greens. 
 

I don’t like the Johnson size contest on who’s club’s greens roll what number. The sign announcing the current green speed at many clubs is the worst!

 

Everybody loves fast greens until they are actually on fast greens.  Slow/smooth is superior to fast/bumpy, but most of these "I love fast greens" people are the first to complain about how unfair greens are when they are rolling at an 11.

 

On 10/4/2024 at 8:37 AM, birdiesNbourbon said:

Tee boxes you play should be based on how long you can consistently hit the ball, not handicap.

 

People need to relax about pace of play.  If you want to play 3hr rounds on Saturday morning, go buy your own golf course.

 

 

For the 1000th time, guys who are asking for a reasonable pace of play are not asking for a 3 hour round.  Most of us wanting reasonable pace of play have enough sense to know 3 hours isn't a possible number on a busy course, yet guys like you always come up with OMG YOU WANT 3 HOURS.  We just don't want to be out there for 5 hours.  Play in 4 hours like a reasonable human, if you want to continue the party with your buddies, go to the bar after the round.  Most guys who don't want or care to respect the pace aspect of the game should just stick with Top Golf.